Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference -- 04 Oct 2019

trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Meeting: Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 04 October 2019

<scribe> Chair: Brent

<scribe> Scribe: Sharron

Evaluation videos

Shadi: Thanks to those who completed the survey. Reviewing items for the second time can be tedious but there was serious thought and effort into some of these comments and it was appreciated to look at those again. Two outstanding issues:
... first is a discomfort with the overall approach. Eric and Kevin provided several very useful edits that can be incorporated. Their specifics were quite specific and helpful. I wonder if we make these kind of changes will it relieve the concerns that people have. Sharron putting you on the spot. You suggested quite a major rewording and revisions for video 1, changing it quite substantially. My

question is how strongly do you feel about this?

scribe: would like to know how you and others are with the overall approach? is this sufficent or do we need more of an overhaul.

<shawn> Sharron: My intent was not to say here's how it should be and rewrite the whole ting. Just to suggset there is a ighter approach. Not to say need to re-do the whole thing. [This week working on AIR and didn't see Kevin and Eric's comments.] I would have been OK with everything the way it was. Yet approach and lanauge seems so formal and stilted. Didn't quite seem to jive with the animation.

<shawn> ... I imagine that Eric & Kevin's specific edits are good. And think I'll be happy to read those and [probably OK].

<shawn> ... I gave rewiters as "something like this maybe", not meaning exactly that specifically

Shadi: Asking a hard question to the group if you have not been able to fully review. But wondering if we think the rewording by Kevin and Eric have suggested will address most concerns or do we need a new approach overall?

Brent: When I read through both Eric and Kevin's comments, removing the word "resource" and using instead the title of the article. This gets at what Sharron had said, and should help address that concern.

Daniel: My posiiton is that I really like the scripts maybe some rewording needed but overall in strong support of this general approach and think the video approach is good. I do not hear the stiltedness and once tht is addressed to everyone's satisfaction, I am strongly supporting this approach.

Kevin: I think when I reveiwed it and read it out loud it seemed a bit stilted but overall good. Sounded like something written to be read rather than heard. Treid to make changes to sound more like speech.

Eric: Mine went to the same point - constructed in way that was more like spoken language. Shorter sentences, fewer lists, less use of vocabluary that we only use, like "resources."

<shawn> Shadi: All y'all use some groovy tools.

Shadi: This is great input and I will take another pass with these suggestions. To see if it lands better.
... next issue was around Video #5, Eric raised the issue that it fails to meet the goal of letting potential users know what is in the document but rather talks more generally about the inclusion of PWD in research and evaluation.

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

<shawn> Objective: Video 5 Involving Users: Emphasize the benefits of involving users with disabilities

Shadi: Not sure what to add becasue these two resources are more general, not as specific or instructive as the previous ones. Could maybe add a few more specifics but wondering what will address your isue.

Eric: There is a mismatch between what is in the video and what is in the resource itself. The purpose of the bvideo is different than the actual video script. We talk about both of those resources and link to evaluation section where there are details that could be worth pulling out and help us actually achieve what we say we want to acheive.
... there are analyzing accessiiblity issues, align results with standards, the headings of the evaluatingsection could be sueful.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say mismatch in "objective" and summary sentence. and link to /evaluation or other?

Shawn: Our objective is good, we only need to correct the summary statement before the script. It could address Eric's feeling of mismatch.

<Vicki> +1 shawn

<shawn> Objective: Video 5 Involving Users: Emphasize the benefits of involving users with disabilities

Shadi: You are suggesting no change to the script, but rather a change to the intro/summary. But Eric did suggest there were things left out. Eric?

<Zakim> yatil, you wanted to say not sure if objective out of context is ok

Eric: We have these videos planned for evaluation, I hesitate to have a video that does not mention evaluation until very near the end. If we decide that we do not want to highlight evaluation as much in this video, I will not object.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say also fine with adding a little about what you'll find in the resource and to say this video should be used more broadly, too! (and, might not point to

Shadi: Now the resource talks about involving PWD throughout development and design. We are reading in the context of the evaluation videos and so it may seem inadequate. So we can decide if we want to emphasize evaluation more or if we are happy with it as it is.

Shawn: While we look at it and will include it with the other eval videos, my feeling is that we should be aware that this may turn out to be a powerful, stand alone video and look at it with that in mind. For example, we may not want it to point to /evaluation at the end.

<Vicki> +1 shawn

Shadi: So while we develop in this suite of videos, do we want to tweak it to be more aligned with that? Ordo we want to embrace the fact that it could be more generally used and not skew it more toward eval?

<yatil> [ +1 for resolving it in Shawn’s way. (It feels also like least work ;-D ) ]

<Mark> +1 for Shawn's way

<Kevin> +1 for Shawn's approach

<HelenB> +1 for Shawn

<Laura> +1

<Lewis> +1

<dmontalvo> +1 to Shawn's approach also

All: Much support for the more general approach, recognizing that involving users is more of a general concern than specific to evaluation.

<yatil> [ /WAI/involve-users/ ]

<shawn> [ Shawn will look up the previous URI, which redirects... ]

<shawn> was http://www.w3.org/WAI/users/involving

Shadi: What do folks suggest that we link to? Other eval video will link to /evaluation , do we want to introduce another landing page /Involve-Users?

<shawn> [ /me kinda like the approach of adding a page under https://www.w3.org/WAI/roles/]

<Vicki> https://www.w3.org/WAI/test-evaluate/involving-users/

<yatil> https://www.w3.org/WAI/planning/involving-users/ -> Link to Eval page clearly

Shadi: To break this down - is anyone uncomfortable with making the link on the endplate of video #5 go to a different landing page than all the other eval pages?
... the second point is to choose to create a new overview page or simply link to the existing overview for involving users?

<shawn> Sharron: since this is broader, makes sense that the link would be to the general page

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to note that the evaluation page says: "Please read Including Users in Web Projects for Better, Easier Accessibility,..." so yeah, we want them to read that first

Shawn: Evaluation page says "please read the other page" anyway. So it is logical to land on the main existing page.

Shadi: Tentative proposal, re there any other thoughts or concerns with this diarection?
... And you will have another chance to comments as we update the intro sentence of video 5, incorporate the suggestions for less formal language acrosee the board, and other suggestions. We will be back for a final review and approval of the changes.
... if you have time and are available, please review the comments, now is the time.

Disability Icons

Shadi: We reached the understanding that these are sufficient for the video but need to be refined and polished before using more widely. We do not want to wait to publish the video but also do not want to encourage a broader use until the icons are more polished. These are the newest revisions for consdieration.
... the issue from the previous dexterity icon was it seemed to represent touch screen. Updated to a waving hand. Is it "good enough" now or what i the feeling about these icons

<shawn> Sharron: don't like the waving hand

<HelenB> +q

<Mark> I don't like the waving hand either. Likewise, I don't have an alternative suggestion either.

<Brent> https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/266292/click_cursor_finder_finger_hand_touch_icon

Brent: The waving hand I like less that the pointing finger. There was one in icon finder that I think could work better. Here is a link

<Zakim> Brent, you wanted to say suggestion for hand

Helen: Do we have to have a hand at all, could we simply use a keyboard?

Shadi: All the other icons are human and then having only one that is a tool?

<shawn> https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/266281/click_finder_finger_hand_keyboard_touch_icon

<yatil> https://thenounproject.com/search/?q=Tremor&i=2480266

<Kevin> https://www.flaticon.com/free-icon/human-arm_105400

<shawn> +1 for showing irregular movement!!!

<Kevin> -1 to showing irregular movement

<shawn> [ I guess Kevin & I just cancelled each other out ;-]

<Vicki> +1 keyboard and hand/finger

Laura: Wondering about the convrsation we had about the icons used only for the video. We agreed if we were going to use it more broadly, we would polish and refine them?

<Zakim> Kevin, you wanted to ask if it needs to look like it is moving

Shadi: Yes that was the agreemtn and we have not changed much about these other than the dexterity one.

<yatil> Good point, Kevin.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say do we need other than a plain hand? and to (reply that icons not separate from video, so not easy to just grab and use") and to (agree with Kevin now.

Kevin: The reason I objected to the irregular lines is that we had agreed not to try to represent various disabilities but to focus on the sensory element itself. The issue is not necessarily a finge or hand, could be an arm as easily. Sharing my tortuous thinking.

Shawn: Kevin reminded me and I withdraw my +1. We do not want to put these outside the video. Won't be encouraging external use.

<Howard> I like https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/266289/click_finger_hand_icon

Shawn: what about a hand (or arm) with no movement line at all

<Brent> Pointer finger only: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/114653/click_cursor_hand_icon

<HelenB> +1 to just a hand, as we have just an ear etc for the other symbols

<Brent> entire hand: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/105176/hand_icon

<Kevin> Quite like the entire hand suggestion - it doesn't hint at any particular usage, such as touch interface

<Brent> +1 to Helen's comment

Eric: I personally don't like the pointing finger, it always implies hovering and clicking. Important that they only repreent what is being said in the video. Does not have to stand alone

<shawn> [ just interesting https://iconscout.com/icon/prosthetic-arm]

<Vicki> what about 2 hands (down the page): https://www.datainnovation.org/2014/02/will-open-government-be-accessible-for-people-with-disabilities/

<shadi> https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/105176/hand_icon

<shawn> [ https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/105176/hand_icon that hand icon doesn't look like stop ! ]

<Zakim> yatil, you wanted to say icons only supporting text

<Vicki> ok

<Kevin> -1 to prosthetic arm

<Howard> -1 to prosthetic arm

<yatil> -1 to prosthetic +1 to the hand

<Vicki> @yatil, true

<shawn> -1 to prosthetic arm, too

<Brent> ack -1

<Zakim> -1, you wanted to prosthetic +1 to the

<HelenB> how about the original icon minus the lines?

Shadi: Clarification of what Eric said that these will be used only within the context of the videos. There are not necessarily explained per se and so to some degree they must be understood on their own. Movement away from prosthetic arm to the human hand.

<shawn> looking at what makes https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/105176/hand_icon work - in addition to wrist, fingers not equal spacing, looks outstreached and about to grab (<- for designer)

Shadi: Estella had said she was uncomfortable with the hand that was submitted. Before we move on, how about the other icons, are we satisfied?

<HelenB> * I guess yes to that Shawn!

<yatil> I’m fine with the eye, but it can be sensitive for some.

Shawn: The problem with the eye was not the width, it was with the heaviness of the inside circle (the pupil, iris)

<shawn> Shawn: weight of the inner ciricle is the problem

Laura: We spoke about the heaviness of the lines and they seemed not to have changed. Agree with Shawn.

<Mark> +1 to soundwaves being better now

<Howard> +1 to sound waves

Shadi: OK will take another pass at the eye, what about the others?

<yatil> I’m ok with the icons

Kevin: Beyond the discussion we have had, the heavy iris, etc overall they are coming together and looking pretty good.

Shadi: Thank you everyone for your time and good comments, that's it for me. Will coordinate with the chairs for the next round of review.

Outreach for Promoting Media resource

Brent: A few more mentions of it, Shawn referenced it at a conference keynote

<shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Promoting_Media_Resource

Shawn: I showed them how to find it within the site and mentioned a few points about it.

<yatil> [ I mentioned Tutorials during my talk for #technica11y on Wednesday. ]

Brent: Several have shared internally with their companies, blog posts, as you do this make sure to add it to the wiki page. Tell us how you've shared it and include verbiage that might be helpful.

Wrap Up

Brent: Lots going on with Authoring Tools and Curricula. Have checked in with Denis and his small group. They meet every other week, making progress toward a presentation in CSUN. Anything else?
... attendence is increasing, great to have such level of participation. Please stay in touch with W4TW and thanks for all you do. Have a nice weekend. Bye all.

trackbot, end meeting

- DRAFT -

Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference

04 Oct 2019

Attendees

Contents

Evaluation videos

Disability Icons

Outreach for Promoting Media resource

Wrap Up

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output