The meeting began with editor's updates of resources:
Brent: Last time we met we faced the reality that we will not be in a position to launch at TPAC and so wanted to level set and see where we are with all the resources. I sent an email to each editor to catch up and got good feedback.
... Today we want to hear from editors where they are in tehir own words, what they need in support and what is next in terms of getting reviewers onboard etc.
... will start with Robert and the Policies
Robert: I have results from usability testing that require changes to the interface and will fold that into the changes to the voice and tone to be sure all is aligned.
... that should be done within the next two weeks and will ask for full group review within the new design of the updated content.
Brent: Next is the Accessibility Intro
Shawn: The W3C site page I have all the input I need. The one on the WAI site, the plan has changed and I need more specific suggestions about what to keep and what to revise. Anyone looking for something to do can chime in on this one.
... for Mobile Accessibility I have updated the standards page and waiting for a review of that and what to do with the subpages are on the agenda for the F2F
Brent: Sounds like these are coming along nicely thank you Shawn. Any questions?
Vivienne: The resource I am working on - Presentations - links to what you are working on. This is true of several items that are in process of revision. Not sure what to do.
Shawn: You should be looking only at your own resource. These intro docs are on my plate, you are not responsible but I welcome your input. They can still be pointed to.
Vivienne: Basically my resource is an organized way to reference the other resources for external (to WAI) training purposes. I created a document with all the places I feel I need additional input.
Shawn: Not sure everyone will look at the master doc so it may be useful for you to ask specific editors for what you need from them and as well to comment on relevance or needed updates as you are able. I welcome your input of the intro docs, for example.
Brent: And we will spend time at TPAC with you on that.
... and next on the list is Older Users resources, Vicki has been the lead.
It has been revised and reviewed and now at the point where we need feedback from the larger group. There are two points - whether (inaudible) and the other point (inaudible) Ready to go ahead and move to the next step.
Brent: My understanding is that you have some unresolved issues that you are ready to bring to the larger group before you finalize with your review team - is that accurate?
Vicki: yes, that is correct.
Brent: We have those questions in an email to the planning group and can put them in a survey. We will check with you before we release the survey.
<Vicki> that's fine thanks
Brent: Next is Developing Presentations and Training. Vivienne has spent many hours reviewing and working to bring this current.
Vivienne: The resource is basically a guide to how to use WAI resources in training. It points to some things that are more than 10 years old. What I have done is to take the basic structure, taking out all the links and instead using links to more recent information. As materials are made current and approved we can add them into the mix.
...The structure is good and these are topics that people can use and we can support it with resources as they are validated. Have mostly looked at what is pointed to, what is completely outdated, and things that are missing like recently created resources like Easy Checks, Perspective videos etc.
... have looked at each link, commented on it and am now in the process of filling in the resources and keeping notes on those that are still needed.
Brent: Fantastic work, not only for the update of this resource but also the opportunity to identify the gaps in materials. And clearly this will need iteration, going back to many times as we complete new resources. Will need to stay on top of this.
Vivienne: Yes, many of the resources that people are working on are not even mentioned here.
Brent: As mentioned we have dedicated time for this at TPAC and can consider those questions then and how to approach.
Shawn: I heard you say "strip out" what about the approach of commenting out things that cannot be pointed to for now.
... likely we should have, as soon as we completed a new resource, found where to point to from training resources.
Vivienne: I have worked on it in a manner in which each link is commented upon and made a justification for why it needs to come out. So I may have done what you suggest in a more roundabout way.
Shawn: I meant in the markup itself, it it was in there - rather than delete the link, comment it out in the code.
Vivienne: That makes really good sense Shawn.
Laura: Just need to be careful about that. We have run into situations where commented out code gets picked up, so be aware.
Shawn: Yes good point and if it was a more serious item maybe would be a problem. In this case, seems like not likely to be much of a problem, since just resources that are being updated.
Eric: I can show you what tags to use to do that.
Brent: Easy Checks is next
Shawn: Only a few minor tweaks for now and will do major revision after launch, excited about that.
Brent: Next is HPWDUTW Norah has done a lot of really good work and Shadi was working behind the scene with her.
Norah: Main work has been on the stories of web users. I think we actually have this one ready to go for the full group review and approval. Made it simpler, easier to read. So wondering how we can do that over the next couple of weeks. TPAC or survey or what?
Brent: Timing is good, we can put out the survey soon and get that approval. Any questions for Norah?
... next is the Biz Case. Sharron?
Sharron: Haven't done much writing lately. Did an intor page rewrite and have been seeking any external validation that people have been using or referencing the subpages.S My tendency is to want to take all of that info out of there. If I had found people who used that detail, would feel better about leaving it in. In the past, I think the business case was something we had to justify more defensively. However now it seems legal mandates are driving accessibility in many countries.
...talking with Shawn she observed that well, it's the right thing to do, then there are legal pressures and by the way, there may be these other benefits. But those are mostly speculationn and not well documented. The result is that we have dense information in these pages but not sure it is useful. useful
<notabene> In France legal is not as strong as business case yet
Sharron:... one idea I had was to pare down to the one page overview and then link to the archive and the historical document. Not try to present it as current but more of "how the business casee has evolved" or something like that, point to it as historical
<notabene> +1 for one-pager
Vivienne: Our legal mandate is not as strong as it is in the US. Therefore some of those other reasons are important, we are often asked for a business case.
... so in those situations, we do need some of those other justifications. What I have found with this resource, however, is that it is too convoluted to expect people to be able to use it effectively.
Sharron: Need to do research and give people hard numbers
Vivienne: Tend to agree with you there. People try to to fold the entire disability initative into inclusion but I find it to be a roundabout approach. But we are asked all the time for a business justification and those numbers do not seem to be available. Looking at this resource, they look to find what they need and so far it just is not there. It is also not very usable.
<shawn> 1. See St?phane's comment about business case above
<shawn> Right, legal not as strong business case in France
<notabene> precision: legal is going to be important for bigger companies once a decree is passed, sometime before 2018. but for smaller companies, incentive is only business reasons
<notabene> we don't have class actions, for example, in France. So making a business case is still useful
Sharron: I will stick to my plan to have a one-pager in place on Monday, circulate among the review group and if we could spend 30 minutes brainstorming the approach at TPAC that will be great.
<Sylvie> Adding to what St?phane said, we have no financial sanctions for people not filling legal requirements.
<shawn> +1 to trying to come up with more succinct one page, *and* pointing to old info for those who want details (but not bother spending energy to update those old pages)
<yatil> <- Understands that this is generally the case in the EU. (-UK)
Brent: Laura and Nic have been working, lots of work on the Selecting Eval Tools with Shadi working in the background...update?
Laura: We will meet with Shadi on Tuesday to try to work through some of his issues and we felt we were very close to done. Depending in the outcome of Tuesday's meeting, we may have a review ready for all of EO for review and apporval.
Brent: May be as early as next week.
Brent: The process of getting from small review team to submit to all of EO for approval. Editors must rewite, put in front of small review team and works iterations with the small team. At that point there may be outstanding questions that need input from all of EO before they submit for approval.
<shawn> Shawn (who cannot speak up) wonders if often it would be useful for Editor/Review Team to meeting sometimes via phone?
Brent: so before you say it is ready for EO approval, be sure that all of your review team has approved everything. The survey should not come back with comments or changes suggested by the editors or review team since they should be in agreement by the time the draft goes to full EO review.
... we don't want the review team to comment during the final approval review but to have accepted the final draft as ready to publish pending EO approval. Need a process for sign off of the review team to ensure agreement.
<notabene> +1
<Vicki> +1 for simple process with e-mail to archive
Brent: editors may send final email to their reviewers and cc public archives to document that it is all signed off.
<Zakim> yatil, you wanted to say reviews on GitHub (makes note to talk about this at TPAC), or issues, or email
<shawn> [Shawn wa disconnected - trying to reconnect]
Eric: If you have your process on GitHub you can use pull requests and assign them to your reviewers. That would provide really good control. We will have a GitHUb session at TPAC first thing in the morning, so I will bring it up. Another way is to document it as an issues and get everyone to +1
<shawn> Shawn (who cannot speak up) wonders if often it would be useful for Editor/Review Team to meet sometimes via phone?
Brent: I like the idea of a simple GitHub issue. Just need a way for it to be documented that all have agreed to the final draft.
<Vivienne> Yes, I think that would be good
<yatil> Remember that you might want to note outcomes of a phone meeting by email or on GitHub, so others can read up on your rationale.
Brent: If you need to have a conference line to do that please let us know and we can facilitate, it is often a quick way to resolve issues.
... so editors, the takeaway is just to document agreement with that final draft.
<yatil> https://github.com/w3c/wai-website/wiki/Redesign-GitHub-Labels
Eric: Once your draft has been approved, or even while you are working on it, we will support you moving your resources into the new design. Over the last week, I added a few labels to the existing GitHub repositories. The most important is wai-redesign-prep which has the steps to convert to new design
<yatil> https://github.com/issues?utf8=?&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+user%3Aw3c+label%3Awai-redesign-prep
Eric: any that are tagged with that include a list of things that need to be done for the resource, the idea is to prepare the teams that the new design is coming to the repository. Content edits may still be needed but the design can be implemented. I will be making new branches and will use it to link within the new repo. Can publish on your repo and we will bring it into the WAI one
... I will do this most of the time, maybe all of the time but if there are people who can help, we will coordinate after TPAC
<yatil> https://github.com/issues?utf8=?&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+user%3Aw3c+label%3Awai-redesign-before
Eric: at the end of the process we will have resources in the proper design and be able to launch more easily. Went through GitHUb issue and tagged each one that needed to be resolved before it can all be checked off. You may say "after" and then I know it has been consdiered.
<yatil> https://github.com/issues?utf8=?&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+user%3Aw3c+label%3Awai-redesign-after
Eric: will help keep all the redesign issues organized and able to be addressed.
Brent: I know that people have different comfort levels with GitHub, so please ask for the help you need.
<yatil> https://github.com/issues?utf8=?&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+user%3Aw3c+label%3Awai-redesign-prep
Brent: Any questions?
... Don't want GitHub to be a block to doing work. If not comfortable, please reach out
Brent: We will do more on this at TPAC with a demo and will be recorded
... Selecting Eval Tools (tentative)
<notabene> [ Stephane won't be at TPAC, hopes you share pictures of good moments <3 ]
Brent: There is a link to the Draft agenda...using some of the feedback, the TF is tweaking the home page and expect to have some of the Visa team there to pull individuals into our room or a hallway. Charlotte and Liz will mostly lead that but others may be asked to help using a script if that is needed, depending on who responds.
<shawn> Also, people can observe Charlotte and Liz's sessions -- and take notes
Brent: will ask specific questions and expect to spend 15 minutes ot an hour per person.
<Brent> F3F Agenda: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_F2F_November_2017
Brent: Have sketched out what we can focus on with flexible times. as we have availability of people who may want to phone in, we are happy to move the times around
... any additions at this time?
<Vivienne> +1, looks good
<rjolly> +1
<Norah> +1
<Laura> +1
<yatil> +1
<dboudreau> still don't know how or if I'll be able to attend remotely, but agenda looks good to me
<Vicki> +1
<dboudreau> so, +1
Brent: PLease take the time to review the work that has been done in prep for the conversations at TPAC, for example Vivienne;s work on the Training resources.
Vivienne: Yes I will be sure I have distributed something before the meeting
Brent: And as things come your way, please try to review in advance
Brent: There is an opportunity to have a breakout room during the plenary day. Shawn submitted the proposal
Shawn: Handled in un-conference method. There is a board and two things have been noted - one is that new people have a preference and things that were in the wiki also have some degree of priority in being chosen.
Brent: Eric submitted one last year to offer EO support for other groups and a look at what we were doing. Anyone interested made their way to our room.
<shawn> Sharron: If accepted, we get a room. Otherwise will find a hallway/lobby space
Brent: since Shawn has submitted this, there is more of a chance to have a dedicated room.
Vivienne: They also have an opportunity for a 3 minute lightening talk during the full plenary session.
Brent: And they are very strict on the time.
Shawn: They do not plan to run out of rooms, so hope to have a room the whole time.
Brent: You may recall that we asked for interest in EO participants who were will support the development of the Understanding docs for the new SCs. They need to be completed in the spring I believe. We will meet with AG to discuss project scope, management, etc.
... communication between groups, we will not be responsible for content as much as style, polishing, etc. We will need one lead point of contact from EO and from the survey results we determined the lead could be brent or Norah and the others as support. At the AG meeting I would like to be able to tell them how many people we have to actively participate in this. So we need a committment from
those who said they are interested in contributing.
scribe: these are so important and I wanted to verify continued interest and commitment. Keep in mind that we still need to keep going forward with our own projects and resource production. So we want to be sure that these commitments are realistic.
<Norah> yes can participate
<dboudreau> with the way things are right now with work, I don't think it would be responsible for me to commit to anything :(
<Norah> +1
<Vivienne> +1
<Sylvie> +1
<dboudreau> I'm ok with remaining on the list, and if I can chime in, I'll happily do it... but I won't promise anything
<dboudreau> Yes, thanks Brent
<Vivienne> I'll need to be careful with my time because of the resource I'm on, but once that it running smoothly, I'm sure that will be okay and I could help.
<Vicki> Not sure I can commit right now, but possibly later.
Brent: Will add a question to this week's survey so that people who were not here today also have the chance to participate if interested.
... thanks to all who can help, will be a good project.
Brent: Will have a survey this week, make sure everyone has read the minutes, uncerstand the processes.
... please do fill out the survey for availability, will try to keep information as fresh as possible. Any other comments or questions?
... thanks all, have a good weekend. Don't hesitate to let us know if you have questions or support needs.
<Vivienne> bye all
<dboudreau> thanks all, bye :)
<Vicki> bye all, bon weekend!