Face to face meeting in March

Brent: CSUN is the 21-23, with two preconference days. Prior commitments and travel constraints led us to suggest Wednesday the 21st in the conference hotel if possible. This would allow participants to come and go between the meeting and the conference easily. So that is the plan we are working on for now.

<Harjit> Hello Everyone, Happy New year everyone. My name is Harjit kaur. I am working with Web key IT Pty Ltd as website analyst. I have joined this group one month ago and this is my first meeting. kindly accept my apology if I interrupted.

<Harjit> It is pleasure to meet everyone :)

Brent: Other conference days are also possible but Wednesday had the most availability according to the survey.

Chris: I'm good with Wed, Thurs, Friday - Friday might even be the best day given the way the conference goes. Not sure if folks are staying until Saturday and I present on Thursday morning first thing

KrisAnne: Last year, the keynote was the evening before - Tuesday.

night.

Shawn: Myself, Brent, and Eric have a session Thursday at 10:00

Chris: I am scheduled for the preconference - I paid extra to attend so Monday Tuesday are not an option for that reason

Brent: Is anyone strongly opposed to Wed, Thurs, or Fri?

Howard: Are people OK with missing a day of the conference that they have paid for? I would prefer Tuesday but can see the results in the survey.

Eric: If I had a preference it would be to focus on EO on Tuesday and not miss any of the conference.

<Howard> +1 to Tuesday

Shawn: Neither of the chairs is available on Tuesday

Chris: What about in the evenings - one or two evenings instead and not miss the conference?

Brent: People often have company dinners or meetings with vendors - what do people think?
... and people often get worn out by the end of the day.

<Chris> fair enough

<Chris> usually on Wednesday

KrisAnne: On the other hand, things that people hear or learn at the conference can spark discussion for our group as well.

Howard: noon on Friday sounds appealing

<Chris> agreed

Sharron: Or start on Friday afternoon.

Eric: I hear a slight preference for Friday and can emphasize the afternoon.

Brent: My own preference was for Sunday/Monday but if I had to choose from only the conference days, I would choose Friday.

<Chris> Friday

Sharron: no preference for days, but not after hours

<shawn> Wed

<Howard> Friday

<krisannekinney> wednesday

<shadi> Friday

<Laura> can't attend. no budget this year

<Norah> not attending

<j-pulido> No preference -- may not be able to attend

<Chris> That said, I can make myself available

<yatil> Friday 40%, Wednesday 35%, Thursday 25%

<Chris> fine with me

<Howard> No objections

<krisannekinney> fine with me, i could do the evening too

Brent: How about if we put this on survey and see what the preference is?

Shadi: OK but I am likely to be unable to attend if we meet during the conference. And keep in mind that it will be a choppy experience because people will be coming and going
... if you do this, the agenda planning must be very careful to ensure that all the key players will be there for the right sessions and discussion points.

<shawn> [ Shawn notes that people need to make airline reservations asap. Folks from Australia have said flights are getting tough already.]

<Chris> +1

<krisannekinney> +1

<Chris> I'm flying out Saturday

<Howard> I could do saturday

<yatil> [ I have plans on Saturday. ]

<Howard> What about Tuesday evening and continue on Friday noon?

<Chris> I can look into refunding my pre conf sessions

Brent: Eric proposed a two day meeting, Monday with the full group and Tuesday hold smaller group meetings to focus on specific resources.
... does that proposal pose any problems for anyone?

KrisAnne: I may miss Tuesday for a pre conference workshop

<Howard> Works for me.

<Chris> I just checked - you can get a refund

<krisannekinney> but i should be able to get there for Monday

<Chris> I would prefer the EO meetings to be honest

<yatil> +1

<krisannekinney> +1

<Howard> +1

Brent: Seeing no objection, shall we plan on that? Monday a full day full group meeting and Tuesday small group work

<shadi> +1

<Brent> +1

<shawn> +1

<Howard> +1

<Chris> +1 if I can work it out

<Roy> +1

Brent: looks like agreement, so let's put that in the minutes as confirmed.

<Vivienne> hi all

<Chris> Hi Vivienne

<Chris> have to step away for a minute - brb

Brent: Meet on Monday the 19th, and Tuesday the 20th with a location to be determined.

Revisions to Intro to Accessibility

<shadi> "yes, you can"

Shawn: Imagine that you are talking to someone who is brand new to accessibility.May have preconceived notions or may never have heard of it. May be developers, amangers, biz dev folks, variety of countries, backgrounds etc. What are the key things you want to tell them. An extended elevator pitch. From that mindset, take a look at the rough draft for the revision.

<shawn> https://w3c.github.io/wai-intro-accessibility/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/

Shawn: initial discussion today, much can be handled in GitHub but a chat about some of this may be useful as well.First question is "What information might be missing?"

Brent: The omission of the statement about how accessibility is best accomplished up front and becomes more expensive later on. Is this concept covered elsewhere?

Shawn: Encourage you to look at what is there - the concept is still there but may not be as clear or as prominent.

<Laura> +1

<shawn> Shawn: This is just a rough concept draft so we have something concrete to comment on. Please consider it open for *all* comments! Feel free to pick it apart.

Laura: I really like the introduction and appreciate that we are not expanding too much and really like the video. I am confident that the resources are good expansion and that we don't want to add too much more to this document.

<Howard> +1 to Laura's comments

<Brent> +1 to Laura

<Nicolas> +1 to Laura's comments

<Vivienne> This is looking really good Shawn

<krisannekinney> +1 to Laura

Howard: Agree with Laura, this is much clearer and better than the old version, great work on this. May want to emphasize the efficientcy of early integration. I liked the more info boxes and the ones on the right are more noticable.

Vivienne: May want to have a point about who else benefits, what the greater benefits are and the concepts that other individuals benefit as well.
... There is specific coverage of the concept within the document under what is accessiiblity. But in the summeary there may be more need for that emphasis.

Nic: Apologies for being late, I think the intro as it is should not be expanded. It is quite lengthy as it is, is solid, recommend not to add more stuff.

Shawn: Are there any parts that should be removed or made more succinct

KrisAnne: Is it possible to take the 3 examples of web accessiblity a bit further down? I don't want people to think this is the 3 things they need to do and then end, move on.

<Brent> +1 to Kris Anne and Nic

<norah> +1 to Krisanne's comments

<Vivienne> sounds like a good idea

Nic: I actually was going to say exactly the same thing. I am torn between having explanatory examples and having them be much more succinct and further down in the text.

Laura: I actually think they are not even necessary in this document at all?

Shawn: What about having them expand, collapse?

Laura: Not really, it is more of a distraction and they may not be ready for that info yet.

Eric: We have the Quick Start Tips and could maybe point to those for examples.
... I found 69 mentions of access and accessibility in the text, may be overkill.

Brent: It was jarring to see the + and it seemed out of place, did not like that it was expanded there. Logically it would make more sense to have the examples in another section if at all. I am leaning toward just pointing to examples.

<norah> +1 to Brent's comments

<Nicolas> +1 to Brent's comments

Shawn: If you link to those, you get to many levels down and then many more examples than they may be ready for. The three examples may be just a way to introduce a few examples.
... as I did the rewrite with one of more links in flow, it seemed that was entirely breaking the coherance. So what if we pulled out the More info links in this document specifically.
... this is just a draft but this version has more info boxes pulled out (thanks Eric for the design tweaks). In general what is the response?

Howard: I like them on the right, it works well since you can kind of see them as you read but dies not interupt the reading flow. It helps that I can easily find it and when I was ready I could follow it. The embedded once were easily missed.
... makes the whole page feel more well organized.

<shawn> [ Shawn also aware of both info flow, and magnification issues. ]

Vivienne: I am not a great fan of the pulled out boxes, the reading flow would not be intutive to AT users, the colors are faint. Embedded, the flow is more logical. Could be AT issues.

Shawn: I hear you and there may be magnification issues as well.

Laura: It may need to be inline when on mobile so that is a consideration.

<Howard> media queries can address the mobile issue

Nic: Not enough contrast, Vivienne? The test seems good?

Vivienne: It was the border rather than the text I was referencing.

Shawn: Another idea was to have them inline but indented a bit. Would that allow the reading flow to be uninterrupted but also easily found when needed.

Brent: The way it is presented, it something is on the right, I can read straight down with the awareness that I can follow if needed. But inline, it seems more insistent - I want you to read this now.
... also in some cases I worry that the content may be shorter than the More info box. Could that be a problem for some people?

<Chris> My only concern is that people who use software like ZoomText may have less success finding that information

Brent: if you really want people to pay attnetion to the additional info, it should be embedded. If it is optional I prefer it on the right.

Shawn: Yes the boxes on the right contain more tangential info.

Howard: I agree with Brent. The inline info is more of cue to "go read this now" Putting all of the links inline will bulk up the document and make it less readable. The way it is organized now is clear and focused would rather not add all the bulk.

<shawn> https://github.com/w3c/wai-intro-accessibility/issues/3

Shawn: Thanks any more about this? I will try a couple of different options. Last question is how to explain the simple statement of accessibility.

<yatil> [ Eric asks shawn to define what "somewhat indented box" is, and I'm sure we can make it work. ]

Shawn: there is background in IRC and I encourage your ideas on this like a definition but not. We find this statement is widely quoted and worth consideration.

Vivienne: I really like the revision. It could go even further can we say "be inclusive so that people with disabilities, seniors, and others..." to make it more broad.

Shawn: Yes and Chris had a similar idea

Howard: I would add that I liked your revised sentence as well and I thought Chris's suggestion was a little vague. Expanding it too much makes it a bit fuzzy.

Sharron: +1 to Howard

Eric:Not really happy with "Web accessibility means"...would prefer "Web Accessibility is..."

Eric: The first sentence should be really on point, message driven, as clear as possible. Maybe say 'web accessibility is' rather than 'web accessibility means'

Shawn: Great idea now how will we actually do it?

Eric: Will think about it a bit.

<yatil> "Web accessibility refers to the inclusive practice of removing barriers that prevent interaction with, or access to websites, by people with disabilities. When sites are correctly designed, developed and edited, all users have equal access to information and functionality." (says wikipedia)

<Vivienne> Brent, for that reason, I usually refer to digital accessibility rather than web accessibility

<norah> +1 like that broader approach, also like the broader range of users that Vivienne mentiond

Brent: I like the direction you are going. The problem at Pearson is when people say "this is not a site, not an application...its a platform" etc. Including the concept of web technologies hits home more for developers, it is improtant for me to have tools and technologies as well.

<krisannekinney> +1 Brent, we have the same issue here. (shocking)

<yatil> [ Web Accessibility is the inclusive practice to design websites, tools, and technologies so people with disabilities can use them. ]

<norah> may need to start with "accessibility" rather than "web accessibility" :)

Shawn: Thank you for the intial discussion, want to move on this, will implement these suggestions and get the resource on the survey.

<shawn> [ thanks for idea Eric! I also don't love "means"; however, I've never figured out a better way. I think "inclusive practice" complicates it quite a bit.]

Site redesign update

Brent:Site design is fairly stable, we are on track with resources. If ediotrs and review teams stay on schedule, we should be on track to launch as we hoped by CSUN. Thanks to James and all who have contributed so much to the effort.

Alternating Meetings

Brent: EOWG will be meeting alternatively on Fridays at 8.30 am as usual and 6:00pm Eastern Thursdays. We don't plan to cover the same topics every week, we won't recap things, so you're expected to read minutes. Any questions?

Brent: Will try not to repeat topics so will want people to read minutes and stay up on surveys, minutes

<Chris> I will and expect it shouldn't be a problem for the most part

Sharron: Who has a sense of attendence for the Thursday evening meetings?

Laura: Should be OK for me

<Norah> I plan to try to attend many

KrisAnne: I will be teaching on Thursday nights so not likely to be able to attend until May.

Nic: Will do my best but interferes with dinner/family time

<Nicolas> +1 to Brent's comment

Brent: Is everone clear about how it will happen?
... will make the surveys specific, clear minutes, and ramp up communications efforts.

Shawn: For those who do have to miss a meeting, the minutes are useful, can follow the process, and reading those can keep you in sync.

Work for this week- Surveys

Brent: Please check in, an email will go out. Any final business?

<shawn> Sharron's minutes are incredibly useful. (and don't take for granted - many groups do not have someone as skilled at scribing - it's hard!)

<Chris> cheers!

<Vivienne> okay, bye all

Brent: Eager to get web site out the door, thank you for a great meeting, all your efforts.