Brent: Getting started, notice the link in the agenda to the animal names and realted levels of review. If there are any questions, please review this link and the explanations. Feel free to reach out to the chairs if questions.
Shadi: There is a new set of vieos ready for your review. The survey lists the changes made by your suggestion and that is the focus of discussion. Want to see how we have addressed the issues. We also want to address the AT icons found in video #4 in the sequence 5.
... [reads from video transcript] need expertise in 4 areas to be effective.
... icons for accessible design, development, AT, and people. The icon for AT was the ear eye etc but was confusing and seemed incongruent to many of you. So we are developing AT icons hopefully to map to the disability icons used previously.
Shadi: in the agenda there is a link to the zip file where you will find icons suggested by the production company. Let's review to see if any of these seems appropriate. While it will be good if we can match the disability categories, it is not critical. Any questions about what we will do?
Brent: Do we want exactly five?
Shadi: That would be ideal but not completely necessary.
Shawn: I disagree. Conceptually there should be more since that is the real situaton.
Shadi: Let's come back to that since we want to avoid the common emphasis on visual AT.
<shawn> +1 for CC - it's well recognized
<Vicki> +1
Shadi: I will share my screen and reading out the file name so you can also browse on your own.
<Laura> +1 for well recognized and agree with Mark on the box
Shadi: firsto one is CC in a box commonly recognized symbol for captions.
<Laura> yes
<hidde> +1 for CC
<yatil> +1
<Brent> +1
<Lewis> +1
Mark: From my experience, even though cc is not universal it is widely recongnixed, seems OK.
Shadi: The disability icons tend to be round sticker like images, so we are using the same for AT icons.
<yatil> +1 to -1 to the circle :-) or -1 to the box
Laura: Don't love the circle in the box
<shawn> disability icons attached to https://lists.w3.org/Archives/
<Laura> icons https://lists.w3.org/Archives/
shadi: I think we can conclude that the closed caption icon is a good candidate that we want to use, with or without circle, but definitely the box
... let's move on to another icon
... the next one is the braille mobile png
Lewis: when I first saw it, even though I knew what it was supposed to be, it did not look like braille to me
... maybe it would be better to have multiple letters or take one of the dots off so that it is a different letter
<Laura> I agree with Lewis. I thought it looked like a mobile phone.
shadi: to what degree is the mobile phone around the braille letter helpful or adding confusion?
cite>Mark: Shawn just made the point I was going to make. Looks like a domino.
Lewis: if we want to stress mobile, it would be ok to have it, but if we're just showing braille for computer _or_ mobile, it is too much phone, too little braille. So it depends on whether we want to stress it is about mobile
shadi: this was supposed to be a braille device, not a phone, so I'll take that away
... does the concept of having braille letters work at all, does the general public know what braille is?
Lewis: I don't know about everywhere, but at this point in the US, new elevators and lots of bathrooms and public spaces have braille with the words/numbers, so I think the general public knows what braille is
... so I think, at least in the US, it doesn't seem to be a problem
<Vicki> Some examples: https://www.flaticon.com/free-
<Vicki> How about this one: https://www.flaticon.com/free-
Brent: just wanted to confirm what I was hearing from Lewis... when I opened the icons first I did not look at the file name. When I opened it, I did not recognise it as braille immediately, probably because all dots were filled, it would probably have been easier to recognise if it was a different letter
... it looked more like apps on a phone. Also, I was not sure why it was on the screen of a phone or a screen at all
shadi: I wonder if we should just have braille on its own rather than on a device
yatil: they are used in a symbolic way, nobody will look at the icons in great detail, they are used in combination with the rest of the video. I think it is fine if they are not immediately recognisable.
... I think if you remove one of the dots, it would be ok
<Brent> Eric has a good point, they will be on the screen very quick and will not be scrutinized like they would be on a static web page. Agree we don't want to over design these.
shadi: on the link that vicki sent, there are some more examples where a hand is used to convey the tactile aspect
<HelenB> +1 for the braille and a hand
shadi: so I guess there are three options: (1) braille on its own, a couple of letters, maybe spell something like WCAG could be funny for those in the know; (2) we try to have a hand along with that, to reinforce these dots are tactile; (3) we also try to add the dots in some kind of a frame to symbolise a device
<shadi> https://www.flaticon.com/free-
shawn: I wanted to note that, when working on something else, we had people saying it looked like domino so it would be useful to have multiple lines to avoid that
<Laura> +1 to something similar to this https://www.flaticon.com/free-
shadi: any other thoughts on the four options?
shawn: I like the icon with a hand, device and a line of braille
<Vicki> +1 for braille+hand, +1 for braille alone
<Howard> I like the braille plus hand
Vicki: I think having the device with braille and the hand would distract a bit too much
<Howard> such as https://www.flaticon.com/free-
<shadi> https://www.flaticon.com/free-
<yatil> +1 to something similar to this https://www.flaticon.com/free-
<Howard> I think the 1 finger conveys the tactile aspect
[ discussion of various graphics ]
<markpalmer> +1 to braille and hand
shadi: I'm concluding from this discussion that braille is a candidate, but it should probably be more than 1 braille letter to avoid that it looks like domino, and also some kind of a hand or finger to symbolise touching.
no!
shadi: are there any comments in favour or not of the i icon?
<HelenB> the i looks fine to me
Howard: why would the i be used for?
shadi: maybe it is too generic
+1 to have icons in a survey, better to see them all together and look at them as a set
shawn: could you bring up that scene in the video and play those couple of seconds, that might help people get an idea of where it will be used?
shadi: I'm happy to
<HelenB> and the survey helps provide context as I assumed it was an infotext icon :)
<HelenB> +1 to the survey on icons
<HelenB> +q
<Howard> I don't mind the screen sharing for the discussion
Hidde: in a survey it would be easier to look at all icons as a set
yatil: we probably won't have time to discuss all of them because we spend a lot of time on each
... maybe we can +1 or -1 before we go into details, to see if anyone has strong feelings about each icon before diving into it?
HelenB: would it be possible to get the context when we are discussing the icons? I thought the i icon was for information
[ discussion of graphics in the video ]
Brent: thanks for showing these in the context of the video, that helps. I also wanted to say these icons will be shown in the video very quick and at the same time the words 'assistive technology' are spoken out
... these won't be on a web page that you stare at for a minute, it will just show very quickly in the video
<yatil> -1
<Brent> +1
shadi: the next icon is the computer sound waves icon. Is this something that makes sense?
<Howard> -1
<HelenB> -1
yatil: it looks like WiFi
<Lewis> +1 to Eric
<Vicki> -1, looks like wifi
<Brent> I changed my mind as soon as eric said wifi. -1
shadi: I'm wondering if the concept of voice coming from a computer makes sense?
<HelenB> better a speaker with sound as this can look like a computer crashing!
yatil: conceptually they all make sense to me
<Howard> I don't think that particular icon works for conveying sound
yatil: but the execution / how the concept has become an icon, does not, in some cases
<yatil> +1. for computer with sound
<Brent> Computer with sound is good concept
-1, I did not associate it with sound or a computer
but +1 for computer and sound
shadi: does anybody have counter thoughts or suggestions?
<HelenB> +q
Howard: if you'd ask sound in general, I'd say no. For sound coming out of a computer, I don't think this icon works. So I think it depends on what you're looking for
... does it have to be a computer with sound, or just sound?
shadi: it conveys text to speech so this is just an idea
shadi: maybe a loudspeaker?
<HelenB> -q
Howard: that would convey it better for me
yatil: maybe head and soundwave like the other icon that we have could be a better way?
<HelenB> +1
shadi: let's move on to the next icon, magnifying cglass over a computer
... is this conceptually something that works?
<markpalmer> +1
<Howard> -1
<Lewis> +0
+1
<yatil> +1 concept, +.5 for the actual icon (lens over the screen would be better).
shawn: magnifying glass on computer is used through out the videos for finding accessibility barrier - checks... there may be a conflict with something that is about evaluation
<Brent> +1, a little vague but it will be with the other icons so it will be okay.
Howard: I thought it was a big vague, it could represent search... we don't see anything being magnified
... I wouldn't say 100% no, but I think it may be a little big
shadi: next one is the mobile keyboard icon, what do people see?
<Howard> too abstract
a table on a phone?
<yatil> +0 to concept, +0 to icon rendering
shadi: I think onscreen keyboards are most known on mobile
... but maybe we need to refine the number of icons
<HelenB> +q
yatil: I don't see mobile keyboards as an assistive technology
... I'm neutral
... another row might make it clearer
Helen: maybe a bluetooth keyboard would be better? perhaps a keyboard with the WiFi icon?
Helen/HelenB//Helen/HelenB
shadi: seems like this does not really work unless we can better convey the assistive aspect of the keyboard
... let's move on, this is another idea for mobility. This is a mouse that is crossed through
it looks a bit like 'forbidden' to me
<HelenB> +1
<yatil> +1 to concept, +0 to icon
<Lewis> +1 to Mark's comment
markpalmer: this is a negative message as opposed to the other ones, that seem quite positive. To me it gives off the wrong vibe
... an icon indicating the replacement for a mouse might be better, but I'm not sure how to represent that as there are so many different alternatives
Howard: someone gave out a sticker at one of our meetings, a bit like this icon but with the text 'no mouse' underneath it... so I think it is out there
shadi: yes, but conceptually it would still convey not a mouse
... it is still quite a different approach
... our next icon in cue is called 'physical', what do people see here?
<Howard> looks like a transmitter to me
<krisannekinney> i was going to say ATARI!
<Lewis> I was about to say Atari
<Vicki> alien
<Laura> dallas TX
shadi: it is supposed to represent a switch device or joystick
... we can improve the icon itself... for how many people is joystick still a thing?
<HelenB> -1 I see it for gaming
<Howard> -1
<Laura> -1
<Lewis> -1
<Vicki> -1
<yatil> +1 to concept, +1 to icon
I have trouble recognising it as a joystick, I think because it is all different parts
krisannekinney: Microsoft's controller for video gaming is becoming recognisable
yatil: I agree with krisannekinney...I think people are surprised when they see a joystick used as an assistive technology, maybe we can look it more like one by adding a t-bar and/or add buttons. In general having a joystick as a switch control is a good idea
shadi: I still see a catch 22... if it looks too much like a joystick people might associate it with gaming
... ok...let's move on to the next one, what do people think of this icon? it is the one called speech.png
<HelenB> +1 - a text phone?
<Howard> very clear that it is a tty
<Vicki> +1, clear
<shawn> +1 clear
<yatil> +1 to concept, +1 to icon (for americans at least)
<Howard> conveys AT
<Lewis> Should be good enough to represent AT
shawn: I think it is good enough, this does great a great job at conveying it is an assistive technology
<Lewis> Even though TTY is being replaced by RTT (real time text)
shadi: ok, let's move on to the next one, for braille
<Howard> this works for braille
shadi: my understanding is that it is written with a capital
shawn: it is not, this was updated in our styleguide
shadi: ok, next item: volume control
<Lewis> looks like a sound board to me
<shawn> I did not see volume control
<Lewis> so +1
<HelenB> -1 looks like an abacus
<yatil> +1 to concept, +1 to icon
<krisannekinney> +1
<Brent> +1
<Howard> too vague - could be a Popsicle
<Laura> +1
<Vicki> too vague
<Howard> needs a square around it to convey sound board
krisannekinney: what if you use the icon that microsoft uses for changing the volume?
<HelenB> +q
shadi: but is it clear how sound control relates to assistive technologies?
krisannekinney: yes if they are used in the video that is about that
HelenB: I was thinking of the icon for volume control like it shows on a computer
https://usercontent.irccloud-
^^ like this?
shadi: if it looks more like a volume control would it look more like an assistive technology?
HelenB: yes I would instantly associate with volume
yatil: trying to think of it conceptually, I think yes, volume control
... maybe we can use the word 'max' with a bar to convey @@@
shadi: let's move to the last one, aA
+1
<yatil> +1
<Howard> -1
<HelenB> +1
<yatil> classic
makes me think of text sizing
<shawn> +1
<Brent> +1
<markpalmer> +1
<Vicki> +1
<krisannekinney> +1
Howard: I think it relates to text sizing... but I'm not sure how people would associate it with assistive techologies
<Laura> +1
shadi: there is going to be different assistive technologies and adaptive stategies, about 5 of them together, and then the narrator says 'assistive technologies'
shawn: it conveys 'adaptive strategy' and that's a good thing
shadi: thank you everybody for your patience, this was very helpful feedback and I think we can reduce the list and come up with a smaller set of icons that I think might address the purpose that we want to address.
... for some of them there is no point in further refining, but others are more promising
... I do want to point out there is a survey open for the five videos, this survey goes until next Wednesday (11th)
... on Thursday we will be recording the voiceover, so after that it will be expensive to change the scripts after that
... please mind this, the earlier the better
shawn: For background, at the end of each video we have 5 icons representing abilities, and we discussed earlier that we want to use those in different places, so we want to refine them.
... so we have done that
... I'd like to open this up for any comments
+1
<Vicki> +1
<HelenB> +1 to no comments
<krisannekinney> +1
<Howard> +1
<Laura> +1
<Brent> +1 no comments
yatil: those are different in width and weight to other icons we use on the site, so we would probably want to look into doing the other icons so that they don't have a different weight
... we probably need to use them as bigger icons, so there will be ramifications. They look good and I like them, but if we want to use them, we would need to take some measures in the site
krisannekinney: my hope is that these icons are going to become consistent across all WAI pages
shawn: yes, that's what we're trying to work towards
... anything else on these icons?
... the survey will go out for those who aren't here
shadi: We (Roel) have been updating the WCAG-EM Report Tool. The main update is to update it to WCAG 2.1
... a lot of the updates are behind the scenes
... [shares screen] so as you can see, the 'Audit Sample' page now has WCAG 2.1 criteria. In the 'Define Scope' step you can now select a 'WCAG Version' and choose between WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.1
... this choice will then be reflected in the 'Audit Sample' section. You can also select this in the 'Filter' section when you're writing up the results from your audited sample
... there is a feature that we have in the currently published tool, that you can go beyond the target that you are evaluating for, we've added that same behavior as well now for WCAG version
... another feature that was added is an 'import' function, it is a very subtle change, but in the menu bar at the top, you can now press 'Import' and upload a JSON files in the EARL format, that some tools are starting to generate
... it will then populate the form for you
... we don't know how much time from Roel we'll have available, the next step is to figure out how much of the wishlist we'll be able to get
Brent: really quick... I'm making an assumption. Can someone deselect both 2.0 and 2.1?
Shadi: [does this in the prototype, it shows they can]
Brent: how about the levels?
shadi: you can definitely make selections that don't make sense
... when you make selections that don't make sense, that's probably your loss, so it might be ok
shawn: I think we should just leave the flexibility, because it may be harder to figure out the rules of what people should and should not uncheck.
... one thing I wonder... if I uncheck something and then check it, my data should come back
... and not be lost
... if it says 'WCAG 2.1' but shows only the new criteria, that would be inaccurate
... I think the survey should clarify how the filters work
<HelenB> +1 I like the way you can get the difference, but a note on the filters might help (the expected functionality)
Hidde:agree to let people make selections that don't make sense. rules too hard. Let people make weird selections.
Brent: yes, probably should ask people to play with filters
Hidde: I think it is fine as it is, it works as it should, the filters do what they say, let's just allow people make weird selections
yatil: I think we can publish as is as it feels like it is only a usability issue & people are waiting to use a 2.1 version of the tool
+1 for publishing as is
shawn: I'm not yet comfortable publishing as is
Brent: let's see what comes out of the survey
... we have multiple surveys opening this week, please respond to them and give your opinions
... thanks everyone for staying