Silver Task Force Teleconference

29 Sep 2017

See also: IRC log


sloandr, MichaelC, jeanne, Jemma, Shawn, Josie, Pete
Jeanne, Shawn


Pete: I sent the excel spreadsheet with the data last Friday.


Pete: I sent it the survey primarily to UX professionals.
... I received 120 complete surveys after the results were cleaned up (incomplete surveys are dropped)
... The first tab is demographics
... self-reporting disabilities 21% reported a disability
... the age majority was 35-49 years old
... countries: most were from the North America about 60%, 13% from UK
... roles: Majority were accessibility work 36%, then UX work.

Dave: We now have some translation volunteers which should help with the English-speaking domination of the results.

Jennison: Were you surprised at any of the results?

Pete: No, it was what I was expecting
... Experience was varied, but the majority weren't beginners, but they had been working about 1-5 years
... involvement in Accessibility? Majority were either "main focus" or "large part of my responsibilities"
... How Important? 60% were "very important" or "extremely important"
... How do you keep up? W3C Web resources-21%, Search engine-20%, advice from colleagues-19%
... there is a list of websites that people go to. WebAim was the largest.
... Components of WCAG familiarity: Principles 22% (highest) through How to Meet - 16% (lowest)

Jennison: Are you going to separate the results by UX vs. A11y professionals? It may be skewed.

Pete: Yes I will

Dave: Interesting that the Principles and Guidelines score higher, when the success criteria are more granular.

Pete: It may be a memorization issue -- that there is so much detial for the SC that they may not feel familiar.

<jemma> Hi

Pete: WCAG Helpful: 3 questions: How well does WCAG 2.0 help in hearning? - moderately well (38%)
... How does it help you in teaching? Moderately 34%
... How well does WCAG help you in applying accessibility - Moderately 50%
... Which aspects of WCAG Success Criteria are most difficult to apply in your work? Is a freeform answer.

Jeanne: a fairly common thread was the technical language or poorly written.

Pete: Make WCAG Better for UX: also a freeform question. Many requests for more code examples and clearer instructions.

Dave: This is evidence that people need more than just success criteria, but it suggests that people are not as aware of the techniques and Understanding document. Those that do know the Techniques and Understanding feel overwhelmed.

Jennison: From an industry viewpoint, they only want the examples.

Pete: It would be interesting to break this out by role. It would be interesting to see what the people who do this work all the time think are most difficult and should be improved.
... How can WCAG be improved to help improve UX? There are some themes that pop up: Examples, clarity, overly complicated, "large wall of text". People are looking for more than text.
... "I've been wresting with this for years. I think the problem is that UX people think in terms of Neilsen's principles."
... ""Rewrite the normative language so it's clear and easy to read using simple language.

"Do not introduce SC that limit which words you can use on a page. That will lose a lot of support from people who would otherwise support WCAG, it;s overly restrictive, and it stifles innovation. Just think about the number of words in common usage now that were not in common usage 15 years ago. Tweet, favorite (as a verb), Google (verb), SPAM, etc."

Dave: General use sites, there was a recommendation to add language that is common usage.

Pete: It is a balance between too high level to help anyone and too general to distinguish the site.
... Other comments: themes of gratitude to W3C, needs to be taught more in schools
... "need clear, up-to-date examples"
... people want to get in quick and get out, that is a challenge today.
... My next task is to do more segmentation of UX and Accessibility professionals.
... I am going to do follow up interviews over the next few weeks with people who said they were willing to do a follow up interview.
... I'm thinking of 2-3 interviews based on some of the interesting comments and expand on the survey.
... please talk about it now, or email me.

Jennsion: How are you protecting the privacy of the interviewees? We are trying to get a pulse of how other people are doing it?

Pete: I keep all the results confidential, I use the common practices.
... informed consent form, keeping the answers private and confidential.
... I recommend recording the interview so you can go back and replay notes, and you have to have a conformed consent.

Jeanne: We couldn't use first names in a report because the community is so small.

Dave: I haven't heard a argument for making the names public.
... we have to provide confidentiality and how the data is protected.
... W3C is a complicated entity
... as a group we have to determine if we are following our own organizations policy, or if there is a policy that Silver group has to follow on our own. It isn't clear how we administer a project so that we don't have to go through multiple IRB processes, but still treat interviewees in a fair and ethical manner.
... It is a different situation with a survey, where people can decide not to answer a question. It is harder in an interview where people may feel more pressure to answer, unless the interviewer makes clear that they can chose not to answer the question.

Pete: Back to the results: I think we should be looking at layers of how the information is presented to users, it isn't a one-size-fits-all.

Jennison: Are you going to present at A11yBos, or at CSUN?

Pete: I have been thinking about it.

CSUN Submission


<scribe> scribe: jeanne

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2017/09/29 15:11:05 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152  of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Present: sloandr MichaelC jeanne Jemma Shawn Josie Pete
Found Scribe: jeanne
Inferring ScribeNick: jeanne
Found Date: 29 Sep 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/09/29-silver-minutes.html
People with action items: 

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]