Update of face to face meeting May 13

<yatil> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_F2F_May_2019

Brent: There is an updated schedule, room assignment, map, etc. Also wanted to mention the parking, use the green lot or the yellow lot.

<yatil> Parking info: https://knowbility.org/programs/accessu/2019/accommodations/#driving-to-accessu-you-need-an-epermit

<yatil> Shuttle service: https://knowbility.org/programs/accessu/2019/accommodations/#shuttle-service-schedule

Brent: use the registration to be sure you are OK'd to park on St. Ed's
... further down are the materials thaat should be reviewed before the meeting
... it is outlined in the Monday and Tuesday time slot but be prepared for change if needed. Those who will call in, please look at the schedule.
... any questions?

Laura: where is the call-in information?

Brent: In the middle of the page is the schedule to say when we will be working vs breaks and/or lunch. Knowing that we have remote participants we will try to be sure to stick as close to schedule as possible.
... WebEx is posted as well.

<Vicki> great to have the call-in info, I will also try to call-in part time.

Instructional Video

Brent: Had looked at it before with Shadi and Daniel. They have taken your feedback and implemented. Will lead us through at this time.

Shadi: Daniel has been doing really good work on the curricula, hope to have a draft ready for your review in advance of the face to face.
... in the meantime, let's look at the videos, want to look at a three year production timeline. By around September we hope to have a few of them. The link from the agenda is to the overall production. First are some very short intro videos of how to use resources - start with 5 of them.
... Looking in more detail, I propose to combine the evaluation ones to three short videos. That will allow the user not to have to watch info that may not be relevant.

<yatil> +1 for postponing the quickref video

Shadi: while working on QuickRef, it occured that it would be most effective to combine with intro to WCAG. Since support docs will be completely revised - they are no longer in TR space but will now also no longer be required to be in the TR style. To include the support docs in the QuickRef intro video would then probably be best to be postponed until the revison of the docs is complete.

Shawn: What is the ETA for the WCAG support doc redesign?

Shadi: I am hoping to be complete in a year from now. Have recently been getting quite a few inquiries about Contacting Orgs. So two questions: Postpone Quick Ref video? Add Contacting Orgs?

Eric: Postponing QuickRef video is a good idea. The other thing is about the contacting orgs - is that still meant to be short?

Shadi: Yes it is a question we need to discuss about length of videos. Planning and Managing for example will explain the key points - each of the 24 suggested items - in the resource briefly to get people to know if they want to read it. The Biz Case on the other hand, may put the key messages out there and be more widely circulated.
... so even though both will explain the resource, it will do it with different slants. I think Contacting Orgs will be somewhere in between. May be some key messages but not a full step by step. Will explain what's in the resource in a brief way but not be a full explanation of everything to do.

Eric: Thanks for that context - good to have guidance beyond what people find on social media etc. In that context, the Contacting Orgs seems like a good idea to me.

Laura: I like it too, a contacting org video will encourage more people to contact sites that post inaccessible content so it is a good thing. Also agree to put QuickRef on hold since it is changing.

Shadi: So it fits to move to the second round deliverables?

Brent: I know there has been a lot of litigation in the past couple of years and it seems to be increasing. One of the first things to come out as a way to avoid litigation is to have an accessibility statement. Would prefer we introduce Accessibility Statements before Contacting Orgs. I agree with postponing QuickRef

Shadi: Would you see Acceessibility Statements as a stand alone or as part of the Planning and Managing?
... and in regard to litigation, some advocates feel that these approaches are not really helpful. We could use this as an opportunity to counter the negative approaches.

Brent: I see the Statements video as a stand alone, it would be nice to have an auditory and visul support for those who do not read it.

<shawn> Accessibility Statements could be a sub-video of planning & managing

Brent: as you were talking, you my be able to combine the two into both Contacting and Statement.

Shadi: So the proposal or request is to develop a short video on Accessibility Statement. It is now on the table for discussion.

<yatil> [ Could do it CGP Grey style and say: "if you want to know more about accessibility statements, watch the follow up video" ]

Shawn: Statements could be a sub-topic of Planning and Managing. Contacting Orgs is near and dear to me but at the same time, we would have to be extremely careful about how it is presented. Not sure we could do it - we should not commit until we get a script that everyone is entirely comfortable with.
... one of the things I liked about the written one is to start softly and that apporach could be useful in the current environment. Would just not want to do it until we are confident we have the message just right.

<Howard> Shawn, could you clarify the current climate?

Shadi: Planning and Managing is an extensive resource. What I heard Brent say is that he wanted a 2 or 3 minute explanation as a stand alone.
... so the question is what is most useful - what do others think?

<Brent> My vision of the video is about the why. Why have one at all. And it should focus more on providing a conduit for someone with a disability to understand that the company is prioritizing it and that there is a place to ask for support (contact).

Eric: Depends on production, if it is fairly simple, may be more feasible to do the niche resources. With higher production values, that will be a lot of work. Risk having our videos become outdated. How volitile is the Accessibility Statements resource at this time?

<dboudreau> +1 to Brent's proposal for a short video on a11y statements (if that's what the question is)

Shadi: We hope to have high production values, will eventually bring in a professional company to refine the message and do studio work. Want people to be engaged and entertained.

<Howard> also +1 to the idea of an accessibility statement if there's the bandwidth.

<Lewis> +1 for Brent's suggestion

<Vicki> +1 to postpone quick ref, +1 for Brent's suggestion

<Laura> +1

<yatil> [ -1 for a video on accessibility statements if highly produced, I think it is very niche ]

<rjolly> +1

KrisAnne: I like the idea of the Accessibility Statement about why you need to do this rather than step by step about how to generate one. Why is it a good thing to have and what does it say about your compnay.

<krisannekinney> +1

Shadi: Eric says this is a niche resource. do you agree?

KrisAnne: Yes it is at this time but that's because people don't understand what it is for. Only a small percentage of companies have one at all. I think that is only because they are afraid that it coould over commit them to 100%. accessibility.

<rjolly> +1000 to Krisanne's thinking there.

Shawn: Let's stop and think about whether an accessibility statement promotion is a priority in terms of our mission of making the web more accessible.

Sharron:Also consider that although it may not be a resource to support actually making sites more accessible, it can be a powerful one to raise awareness inside a compnay of their current status and encourage them to look at what is needed to get there. Agree that many companies are in fear and denial. So talking about statement as awareness and a way to lowers the fear barrier, could be seen as a way to introduce people into the community and encourage wider advocacy.
... but I do agree with Shawn's point that promoting Accessibility Statements is not priority in terms of direct development of skills to do accessibility work. But we should consider the vlaue it may have in terms of raising awareness and understanding.

<yatil> [ I think other resources can help with that, too. ]

Shadi: Proposal to move forward: Nothing is carved in stone. I will create requirements for both so you all can review. Even if not attending the face to face, please consider and submit your comments.
... we can then decide how to prioritize.

<Laura> +1

<Brent> +1

<Vicki> +1

<rjolly> +1

<Howard> +1

<krisannekinney> +1

<dmontalv1> +1

Shawn: It would be awesome when planning and producing the videos if we can make it easy to swap out screen captures as resources are revised and updated. May want to include that ability in the planning process, e.g, deliver visual track and audio track separately.

Shadi: Let's turn that around for all y'all. My hope is that for all the videos that screen captures of the resource itself will be minimal for that reason. For one thing it is boring to show a screen and another is that we have other ways to illustate. Homework for everyone is to think about the visuals. What do you see?
... will it be talking heads, animations, icons, what will have a strong recognition value, branding potential?

Denis: Not so much to answer that particular question because I may never get out of it and trust you to make good calls to make something more engaging. I can't help thinking that the more energy we put into creativity the less resource we have for how many we can do.

Shawn: I agree Denis, we must balance. Each will be slightly different. Some, like Planning and Managing will be an intro to lead people to the actual resource and the Biz Case will be more stand alone with the concepts presented in the narrative itself. But if the point is to lead people to the resource, seems like screen examples should be shown, so they are comfortable when they get to the resource that it is the right one that the video was talking about.

Shadi: If we are using actors it will be brief shooting with more done in post-production.

<Vicki> A lot will depend on the resource.

Eric: People can be comfortable with visuals if we produce graphics of the resource and use them in the video. Could also consider animation with voice over rather than actors, heads talking.

<shawn> wrench = animation instead of human

<yatil> [ We would also not get the same actor when we create new videos in the future :-) ]

Shadi: Yes, we need to develop a consistent style and manage the resources not to exceed capacity. So the homework is to think about how to visualize.

<dboudreau> Though, developing, preserving and maitaining some kind of brand guidelines for the videos should remain a priority, regardless of how much resource and energy we end up investing into it

Denis: The whole idea to make sure they are recognized as EO videos is important and may need to be a separate budget item.

<Sharron>+1 to Denis' style guide suggestion

<Brent> +1 to branding WAI style videos - great idea

Shadi: Yes agree entirely, can use all sorts of different magic to do that. Must think as well of the content itself. Is it OK to use animations in some, talking heads in others, dramatization in still others...can we mix and match depending on the resource or best to remain consistent.

<Brent> Brand with the Intro and Credits. Content can be different.

<yatil> [ +1 for title cards and stuff :-D ]

<yatil> [ No need to re-do old videos, imho.]

Shawn: As we think about the brand, let's consider the 11 awesome Perspective videos we have. Let's come up with the overall brand consistent with those but after that, let every video use the method most appropriate to their own message.

<Vicki> Brand is important. For the content: I like a variety suited to the resource.

Lewis: Shawn's point is good. I am pretty old school. I recall shows like Mr Wizard where they used the method most appropriate for the message. As long as the endplates are consistent, the content can be communicated in different ways.

<dmontalv1> +1 to Shawn and Lewis

<shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Video-Based_Resources/Evaluation_Introduction

Shadi: OK I will be adding the requirements analyses and ask you all to do this homework in preparation for the face to face

Evaluation video

<shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Video-Based_Resources/Evaluation_Introduction

Shadi: I was looking at these two planned projects and I think there are fairly distinct audience. The message for everyone is "WAI has a resource for that" showing off that we have a lot of support for evaluation, etc.
... an elevator pitch about what you would tell people about why evaluation is important and that WAI has the guidance.
... after the intro, people may ask "Is this something I can do?" and the next would be to say yes and here are different ways, different levels, different reporting methods. 3 levels are anticipated and we propose three seperate videos to meet different needs.
... they would be stand alone. Can refer to the others, the intro, etc creating a dependency but not piling everything into one long video.

<dboudreau> works for me

Shadi: Video 1 is a 1 to 2 minute video giving a broad overview. The other two I would hope to be no longer than 1 minute each. Any initial thoughts?

<Howard> I like it.

<Vicki> +1 good plan

<Vicki> Video 3: the part "???" maybe not necessary.

<rjolly> keeping the videos in short, distinct segments seems good to me. They can stay related but also allow for more specificity

Brent: I like the content and the way you segmented it. Looked at first like video 3 may need to be longer. Now that you have explained, I envision the resources sliding acoss the screen as the voice describes the comprehensive guidance that is available.

Shadi: The question is whether to link out to resources or step peopole through the resources in more detail in the video.

Laura: I do not think you want to go through the resource in detail. If you extend the video beyond a minute, you will not get as much attention.

<yatil> [ Or a 1 minute intro and a 5 minutes in-depth video. ]

Shawn: Ideal would be if videos 2 and 3 are *not* dependent on the first one.

<rjolly> +1 to that idea from Shawn to make #s 2 and 3 not entirely dependent on the #1 video

Shawn: Also good to keep in mind the audience for videos. Have found that in some cases the Perspectives vidoes are almost *too* quick since the point does not always sink in.
... It may be that *some* of these really are training videos and can meet the needs of people who learn best not by reading but by seeing and hearing. Need to look timing, when we are doing what, and how flexible (updatable) can we make the videos. And we should recall that Easy Checks is also being updated.

Shadi: So do we want to have these as overview or in depth? Reminder that having a full training resource video does not negate the need for short intro video.
... have to balance expense of long training videos. The more specific detail, the more risk for being quickly outdated.
... which (if any) would we want to be a full training?

Vicki: Overall I like the plan. Video 3 could be a bit longer. May want to keep the short intros in any case. I think there is no need to add the Accessibility Statement in here, there is already quite a bit in evaluation resources.

<shawn> +1 for *not* details of Easy Checks. +.5 on more details of WCAG-EM Report Tool

Shadi: Thanks for that perspective.

Eric: In terms of video, short is almost always better. Start with the script and get to the target that you are comfortable with. 10 minutes, even for training, is a standard and considered optimal.
... to get in depth and a full training video you may need to be willing to spend more time. Most people who come to our site are not there for fun, for entertainment. They come because they must and it would be good to engage and entertain them.

Shawn: The outline for video 3 is that there is not much real content, may want to include more about what is the eval methodology and how the tool works.

<yatil> [ 10 minutes for all three videos, about 3 minutes each ]

Shadi: How long do you estimate?

Shawn: No idea.

Shadi: As a presentation, how long would it take you to cover?

<Vicki> Video 1: 3 mins, Video 2: 3 mins, Video 3: 12-15 mins

Shawn: I could sit through 4 minutes and I don't like videos.

Daniel: I am inclined to expand video 3 - headings, navigation, etc - showing how to get through the page. Likely to last through time and would give the video more traction. Using real people navigating and using it.

Shadi: want to be cautious about getting into specific techniques, could easily expand into multi-day course.

Daniel: Using real people with disabilities

<Vicki> casting = big bucks, too

Shadi: none of these was expected to show real users. Other ones, down the line may do so. These are envisioned as a lower effort to use voice overs and actors.
... Lots of 'people videos' in future, but these not envisioned that way.

Denis: I cannot envision a 4+ minute video useful to me as a trainer. I could not use it in a classroom with people who are there to learn. If they are small enough, they can be used in that setting, but 4 minutes is too much.

Shawn: Good point for each of these videos. Maybe mostly we do *not* expect them to be used within a training, but more independently viewed.
... otherwise if stand alone, to cover the topic would need more time.

Denis: Short videos can be used in a training setting.

Shadi: Interesting, I did not anticipate that use of these videos. The Biz Case maybe. These are more about self-teaching and learning. May want to lock that down in the requirements, may want to add to the face to face discussion.

Vicki: I see Videos 1 and 2 up to 3 minutes and video 3 as long as 12 or 15. I see it as self-learning as well.

<dboudreau> for the record, Deque IS using the perspectives videos in training

Shadi: Perspectives videos were designed to be used in trainings. These are meant to be a slightly different use.

<dboudreau> BUT I WANT MORE!!! :D

<yatil> Knowbility is, too.

Shadi: anything else?
... Summary is that videos 1 and 2 could be a bit longer but have to look carefully at Easy Checks redesign. Video 3 up to 8-12 minutes.
... report tool is also being redesigned so we have a few wrenches to consider.
... 2 other requirements doc, will be adding more. Your homework will be to review these in detail. May do a survey to collect input from those who won't attend face to face.
... also think about the visualizaton.

Planning and Managing/Biz case videos

<shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Video-Based_Resources/Planning_and_Managing

Shadi: Thought for P&M are that it is an extensive resource and the idea is to get people engaged by letting them know what is here, how to use the content, more of an overview. Thinking 8 to 10 minutes. Highlight the content headings with brief explanations of what they are meant to do.

<shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Video-Based_Resources/Business_Case

Shadi: something that someone who is suddenly given this job can use the overview to understand how to use it.
... the Biz Case is meant to be either used in training or circulated on its own. We intend to use the catchy phrases within the resource. Being really positive about the message. Sending people back to the resource if interested but also getting the message out without having to read it.

Brent: An objective for the Plan and Manage is to hone in on the message to think about accessibility all the way through any project. from start to finish, integrating accessiiblity into planning any digital product.

Shadi: Making sure that it is throughout the implementation and development as well as the planning phase.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say she has different position on this one ;-) given audience and scope and goal. (is this intended to *replace* need to read resource?)

Shawn: I may have a different position - for evaluation I can see a need for someone wanting a walk through how to do it. In Plan/Manage, however, I have the opposite expectation. I can't imagine a project manager watching this as a video

Sharron:My understanding is that the video is not intended as a training. Is the intention for it to be "look at all the aspects covered here"? I did not hear that you meant for the video to each each of the 24 points in the resource - did I misunderstand?

<shawn> [ Shawn notes currently says "run-down of each consideration listed in the resource (24 items)"]

Shadi: If we hit all 24 of the points, even at 20 seconds each, we would get to 8 minutes. It is up for discussion. If it is shorter we would pick examples.

Shawn: One of the points to consider is do we intend for the video to take the place of the resource? Would they not need to go read it?

Shadi: Yes and no. The first time through I will get a rundown of what the resource contains. Back in my daily work as I think about I might go back to get detail, links on specific points.

<shawn> ftr - I don't at all "object" to longer video. personally I think not right, but still OK if others like it!

Brent:When on queue I didn't explain myself well. Trying again. My idea is that the video should explain why planning and managing is so important in order to be thorough.Ithink it should encourage planners and managers to be proactive about addressing accessibility. Explaining that the resource helps you think of all the various inputs and tactics to address accessibility. Just a quick understanding of what is in the resource.

Sharron: OK, now that I understand the intention to present each of the 24 points in the video, I will say I think that's the wrong approach. It seems a shorter overview with maybe a couple of examples will be more useful. Not every project is likely to have a need for all 24 points and/or the person exploring the reource may ahve a very specific role and not relate to all 24 points.

<yatil> [ 24 videos! ]

<shawn> +

KrisAnne: Covering all 24 points will lose people

Brent: Would like to see more of an overview of why this a great resource, maybe a shorter explanation of why we like it.

Vicki: tend to agree with KrisAnne, go for a shorter one since the 24 points can lose people.

Shadi: Thank you, I will rework it and have the analyses ready by late in the day Monday. Please cosnider for the face to face if you will be there or not.

Overview of ARRM progress

<dboudreau> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Role-Based_Decision_Tree

Denis: Following the CSUN face to face and the great feedback we got from all of you, we considered the discussions and useful observations. The bias seemed in favor of the developer. Robert says maybe we should end as a default to a PM to make sure things get appropriately allocated.
... Sarah said we need to integrate testing - even though they are not primary, they do need to be brought in if nothing else just to demonstrate they were not forgotten. To be in the process they must have understanding
... the original decision was 5 roles, now we shuffled around and have an entirey different approach with 7 roles rather than 5. Moved the developer away fro first position, added the PM as the default at the end, separated business into two roles and added QA.

<scribe> ...new version asks different questions at the first. For each role, we redesigned or revisited the task points to help people understand what category is appropirate. High level elements define what each role may be responsible for.

<rjolly> +1 to merging the Development roles... kudos Denis and team.

Denis: Eo can now review, see how UX design has moved to the middle of teh process rather than the end, we merged full stack and front end developers.
... making more tables of task points but today let's focus on the roles.
... we are very pleased, this feels much more mature. We know it can still be improved and would like you to run through it, try some of the task points and see if you find gaps or any holes in the examples.
... in the next week we will put these considerations into a survey to finalize the primary decision tree before we start assigning second level responsibility.
... We wanted you to know the feedback was very helpful and has led to improvements and a more mature model.

<krisannekinney> thank you Denis and team!

Brent: Thank you Denis, excellent work and we will continue to use it

Denis: yes on first impression everyone said "looks good" and only when we started using it did we get the refinement and help - very useful!

Sharron: Great work, Denis and all, thanks!!

Brent: That's a wrap, please keep an eye on work for this week. We will post surveys in preparation for the face to face. Thanks all and have a good weekend.