W3C

- Minutes -

Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference

23 Feb 2018

Summary

Sharron introduced the current iteration of the Business Case for Accessibility, which she is editing. She asked for group review and input on the format of the landing page and the proposed treatment of the sub-topic pages. The discussion that followed was generally in favor of the direction the draft has taken. Suggestions include:

Sharron thanked everyone for their consideration and asked that if anyone should encounter good case studies or have one in their own workplace that they can share, please do.
Next Brent announced that editors are needed for the following resources: If you are able to help, you will work with Shadi who was the original editor to determine requirements and update these materials. Brent also let participants know that chairs and staff are finalizing the agenda for March's face to face meeting at CSUN. The meeting wrapped up with a reminder to review the Business Case, add comments in GitHub or in the survey, add items to the Face to Face agenda if you have a burning topic you would like to be considered, and complete the Work for this Week. Thanks everyone!

Agenda

Attendees

Present
Sharron, Shadi, Laura, Robert, Shawn, Sylvie, Brent, Chris, Eric, Howard, KrisAnne, Vivienne
Regrets
Andrew, Vicki, Amanda, Matt, Nic
Chair
Brent
Scribe
Sharron, Brent

Contents


Business Case

https://w3c.github.io/wai-bcase/business-case/

Sharron: The landing page is fairly stable. There are some things going on with the controls at the bottom of the page, so let's focus on the content today rather than the technical.
... The tone is more conversational. The landing page has a summary of each of the drivers behind implementing an accessibility program.
... There is a recurring theme that takes you into the detail that "accessibility is good business."
... The summary leads the viewer into a more detailed discussion, with a case study and resources that will give deeper insight into that particular driver.
... I want to check in with everyone today. Am I staying on track with this approach? What does everyone think about the direction?

Robert: I read it thoroughly and like it very much. There are some places that could be tersified, but it is in the right spot to move forward and call for edits from the group. Read well.

Chris: I like it as well.I notice there is a passage that says usability studies bring great outcomes. Is there a link or something that we can refer to for quantifiable evidence to show that?

<shawn> +1 that if we say there is a study to support something, we have to have a reference (even if just in a footnote kinda way)

Sharron: Good suggestion. I will note that and see what we can comfortably reference.

Shadi: I really like the direction and the design :). Agree with the comments shared so far. Do think it can be tersified a bit more.

<shawn> +1 to some dicussion now -- we have time in the call today

Shadi: Some initial reactions from a quick look at the resource.
... I almost missed the further summary on the initial page. I was wondering if the landing page summaries should be moved to the sub-pages so they are not missed.

Sharron: Other thoughts about that?

Shawn: I agree that because some will point to a specific page, it may be missed. Can move it or repeat it at the least.

Shadi: About making claims. It would be good to back up the claims that are made with some type of data. The pages are not done yet so this may be coming. There are some people that are not convinced and they will want to see the data.
... Can even back it up with a logical argument. We don't have to belabor the text and make it long. Could have a section after the case studies with some fo the data to justify some of the claims that we are making.

Shawn: Could be in a side box call out. The justification can be situated there so that it does not break your flow of the summary or furhter defining content.

Sharron: I will work with Eric to implement the box call out idea.

Shadi: Next is the driver section. These are all good arguments, but just listing them and the titles did not pull me into "caring" about the argument.
... Title of the pages do not resonate with me to catch my interest to understand more.

Sharron: What would resonate with you?

Shadi: Needs more than just something for the good cause. Need terms that translate the Return on Investment. Need more business terms.
... Thought it was a bit United States centric.

Chris:I think to Shadi's point that these might indeed be more North American drivers.

Sharron: If you have other resources that would broaden the arguements, I would appreciate those links to information that can be included.

<Chris> Just a heads up - the link to the UN site throws a 404 error

Shadi: For example, anti discrimmination...
... Not sure exactly what links and resources.

Sharron: Not willing to give up the current case study, but could add another one if I can find it.

Shadi: Also, the prioritization of putting the legal risk issue up front sort of speaks to US first.

Sharron: Previously when we discussed, the legal risk section was lower and people wanted to move it to the front. That was not just US participants as well. We can add that as an explicit question on the survey.

Shadi: That is it for now. I really do like the tone and approach of this resource now. Good work!

<

Eric: We need to be thinking about who we are targeting. It is not those who don't want to work on accessibility. Need to give arguments to people that are on their way. We need to recognize that we won't capture everyone on each of the points and shouldn't try. Even in Europe there is always some level of risk to ignore accessibility. I may not put it first, but it is a very important point none-the-less.
... I like the direction of this new iteration.

Shawn: One of the main target audiences I believe is someone who cares and wants to convince their leadership or organization. people who are only focused on ROI. Unfortunately even the US legal requirements are becoming weaker. in US now, too
... Case studies - We might want to have a more clear cut call for examples. Specific case study.
... There are people who are only focused on Return on Investment. We need to be sure to figure out the best way to meet the needs of that group.

Sharron: Idea - Drive Innovation and ROI.

Shadi: To respond... After reading the very first introduction, and Accessibility is Good Business. If that is the approach we are taking, we need to be consistent. It does not have to be all ROI, but should be called out more if that is the approach.

Sharron: The case study on Support Diversity and Inclusion is about including people with disabilities, but the work force is a fast food chain. The ROI is excellent and the turnover of employees decreased. Didn't have much about digital accessibility but more about inclusion.

Kris Anne: Question - Do we give people a good reason "why" it is important to do usability studies?

<shawn> KrisAnne - here: https://www.w3.org/WAI/users/involving

<yatil> krisannekinney: you want to contribute your experience to the business case? :-)

Sharron: The resources that we linked out to give good information about the reasons and support for doing usability studies.

Kris Anne: I have seen a lot more information at conferences and other places about the importance of doing usability studies so it is important. It will help people understand that they will see the barriers that are present.

Sharron: The more case studies and the broader base that we can get them from will help with these examples.
... Thank you all, this has been very valuable feedback. There will be more questions on the Weekly Survey so you can think more on this and put issue in GitHub. Any further feedback is greatly appreciated.

Editor openings

Brent: As we prepare for the re-launch, we are wrapping up exisiting resources and starting to look beyond that. In thinking about the F2F, we are looking at the charter, thinking about what's next, and the planning team is considering how to organize and approch our next projects.
...to support that, we need to find out who is willing to step forward as resource editors to involve them in the planning discussions.
...specifically for two resources, not dependent on the redesign so the timing is separate. If we have a lead, we may decide to add to discussions at the f2f. Is there anyone able to step up as a solo or duo team to lead on the editorship?

Selecting Authoring Tools: https://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/software

Better Web Browsing: https://www.w3.org/WAI/users/browsing

Shawn: One possibility is to get started, update requirements, develop a general approach and that would allow us to do some consideration and work on them at the f2f.

Robert: once i'm done with customizing design, i would be able to roll into one of these

<Vivienne> I think I'll be busy with the training resources for quite some time, sorry

Brent: So if anyone has the time and interest in working on these, we will put them on the survey and of course if anyone knows they will be is interested in being editor at this time, speak up here and now.

Robert: I have some work to wrap up on Customization and when that is done, I am willing to help on either of these, would want a partner for Authoring Tools.

Shadi: Completely agree that the priority is the launch but wanted to confirm that Better Web Browsing was meant to be very generic. A lot of the text may not need too much work. Rather it is to update links and give consideration to the links and maybe reorganize the content to make it more scanable. That's the kind of work needed.

Brent: Yes, the planning team needs to consider what resources need a more frequent review cycle, someone continuously checking and updating links. ...anyone else possibly interested?
...should you decide that you are able to help, you can add to the survey. Any other comments about this?

WrapUp

Brent: The survey for this week is open until Tuesday Feb 27. Edits, small revisions were done by Nic and Shawn on four resources. Should be quick to look at the diffs and make a comments and/or approve.

<Sylvie> I answered to the survey but it is difficult to find what changed, so I only read the new documents.

<shawn> Thanks, Sylvie!

Brent: A few other questions about QuickRef, Biz Case, and such. Anything else?

Shawn: People please remember that it is easier for editors if you put your comments in GitHub. We have added links to the appropriate GitHub so please do try to use those. Anyone still having trouble with GitHub?
...Two more documents with minor edits coming soon.. Those resources are Contacting Organizations about Inaccessible Web sites and Accessibility, Usability, and Inclusion.

<shawn> Contacting Organizations about Inaccessible Websites

Brent: Give some consideration to how you classify your input - is it editor's discretion or a strongly held opionion. Also if possible provide an alternate solution so the editor does not have to guess how to address your comment.

Brent: Any new business?
...planning team is currently working on a draft agenda for the f2f. Hope to have a good draft next week. Anything else?

Eric: Redesign update includes progress on all the urgent issues. Now we have attention to the details, getting them in shape. Expect to make more progress and are pleased with the big steps forward that Shawn and I have made.

Brent: Thanks all, see you next week!

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2018/02/25 08:42:30 $