Evaluation Video survey results

Shadi: Thanks to all who completed the survey, there were 9 or 10, a good response. Our hope was to get this completed before taking up the next deliverables. There are still a few bugs, wanted to be sure all outstanding questions are resolved and move to publication.
... [shares screen] We'll start with V5 and some new things that came in. We have the scene where "..unfortunately..." with the checklist flying in. There was included a slight "easter egg" of shift left. Is it worth it to make that shift or shall we keep it as is?

<mpalmer> +1 for keep as is

Sharron: no preference

<Helen> +1 keep

<kevin> +1 keep

<Lewis> +1 to keep

<Sylvie> No preference

Shadi: OK thanks for resolving that first issue. Next is the process wheel, there were no comments. We had discussed quite a bit about how to represent the transisition to a stronger process. There was one comment suggesting that as it presents now, when all meeples reach the edge, the clarity of the process comes in at once. Suggestion is that when the meeple approaches the process arrow, the color will change at that point and would get stronger as the process is enriched.

<shawn-vacation> +1 to as each mini-meeple gets to the line, it gets colored

<mpalmer> +1 to kevin's suggestion

+1

<brent> +1 to clockwise effect

<eoncins> +1 to Kevin's idea, I like it

<Helen> +1

<Lewis> +1

<hdv> +1

<kevin> +1 to my suggestion :)

<Lewis> +1

<Laura> +1

Shadi: OK good, that was really it that I wanted to bring for further discussion. Also wanted to confirm that the barometer progress will also change incrementally. Also will outline the gauge so that they are distinguishable. Maybe black?

<shawn-vacation> +0.25 needle black

Denis: A black border would do it

<Helen> +1 to a black outline on the needle

Kevin: I agree it does not need to be a heavy one.

Lewis: And if it was all black it would go back to looking like an auto gauge.

<yatil> e6e6e6+1 to my suggestion to outline the needle

Shadi: Great will do. Otherwise is that the meeples would appear from the center and the circle would fade. That has not been doen quite as we discussed but we will revise.

<dmontalvo> It does resonate with me

Shadi: There was also a sound comment that the popup sound made as the meeples appear is sharp and should be softened.

<yatil> Sound is ok for me, but some softening might be ok, if it is a quick fix

Brent: I agree that when I heard it on the first video for the first time it startled me and I found myself wishing it was a bit softer.

Daniel: I would support Brent's point and soften it a bit. The bubble ones as well may be too sharp and may need to be toned down a bit.

Shadi: Are we saying to simply turn down the volume or change the sound quality itself?

Shawn: It woould help a little bit.

Brent: Yes it was a bit too loud, the quality fo the sound was OK ofr me.

Shadi: Given where we are, an easy fix will be to turn down the sound volume but keep the quality, that is my proposal...

<dmontalvo> +1 to Shadi's proposal

<yatil> +1 to Shadi's proposal

<Helen> +1 to make the twang more quiet :)

<shawn-vacation> +1 to lower the volume of the current sournds

<kevin> +1 to volume

<Howard> +1 to volume

<eoncins> +1 to lower volume

<mpalmer> +1 to volume

<Lewis> +1 to volume

Shadi: Brent noriced that the icons at the end appear at slightly different relation to the computer in allof the different videos. We can count it as a bug and get them to change it.
... is that what we want to do?
... or can we leave it as is?

<shawn-vacation> maybe note it them and let them decide if they want to fix it?

<yatil> +1 for consistency

<Helen> +1 to fix it

<kevin> +1 to fix

<Zakim> shawn-vacation, you wanted to say since we're making changes anyway: stars

<shawn-vacation> As the narration continues to say "have higher customer satisfaction", a five-star rating (looks like a typical widget used on many websites to rate and review things) appears above the people. The stars get filled as the narration speaks, and there is a visual emphasis when the five stars are filled.

Shadi: We did say they would be empty and get filled - what do otheres think?

<Helen> not on top of the people as might be missed not as easy to view but +1 to the empty outlines being filled

<kevin> +1 to outlines

<yatil> +0

<eoncins> +1 to Shawn and Helen

<Zakim> shawn-vacation, you wanted to ask about color of the stars

Shawn: And is there a better color?

Kevin: Gold or yellow is common

<yatil> Looks gold to me...

Shadi: OK I will take this to the group and coordinate with the chairs if anything needs to come back. One last thing in V1
... if they change the colors of these three tiles, it could be a simple fix. What do you think?
... they overlap when they are switching and so need to maintain contrast. The numbering changes as well so it could be simple.
... keep it as is or change to red?

<dboudreau> +1 to sticking to one color

<Laura> +1

<shawn-vacation> +1 for all the same color red

Denis: When I see two different colors so if they are not meant to represent different types of issues, they should stick to one color

<Lewis> +1 for same color

<kevin> +1 to same colour

<Helen> +1 to same color

Eric: I think it should be the same color, does not need to be red.

<brent> +1 for same colour

<eoncins> +1 to Eric if same color maybe a different colour than red

<yatil> +1 to color change

<yatil> (red is ok)

Shadi: To avoid having the color pick discussion, let's just stay with red.
... these are all the issues, if there are additional questions or comments, please let me know. This is the last chance to speak up.

Sharron: Thanks Shadi for taking all the comments and responding, good work!

March Face to Face meeting

<yatil> EOWG F2F Agenda March 2020

Brent: There is a draft agenda/brainstorm for Mar 9 and 10. One item that has been assigned to a day is the ARRM work for Tuesday. take a look at this draft list.

Hidde: I don't have specifics yet, but would defintely like to bring some of the Authoring Tools work to the list to be considered.

Shadi: And Hidde is also working on Requirements for the supplemental guidance. May want to get Silver folks involved. We introduced the project quite a ways back but we think it is time to re-animate the work and try to sketch and brainstorm to kickstart that up again.
... core is the understanding docs but there are more from low vision and cognitive TF that may be added. Not like tutorials etc but more directly tied to the WCAG. ATAG etc. The wording and structure of these documents needs to be overhauled. Maybe tagged so it is filetrable and more easily searchable.
... asking what is the scope of supplemental guidance in order to draw some lines around what we want to focus on.

Brent: Is everyone OK with us taking this to the Planning Team and shaping the work or do we all want to help with that definition?

<Laura> +1

<yatil> +1 for brainstorming at F2F

<shawn-vacation> +1 that this will be a big deal and needs EOWG input :-)

<Laura> +1 to F2F

<Howard> +1

<kevin> +1 to F2F

<dmontalvo> +1 for blainstorming on F2F

<krisannekinney> +1 f2f

<dboudreau> +1 to F2F, but on Monday ;)

<eoncins> +1 F2F

<mpalmer> +! though I'll also not be there :(

<Zakim> shawn-vacation, you wanted to say who will be at this F2F? https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_F2F_March_2020#Participation_2 has only a few :-(

Brent: OK then it sounds like people are interested and would like to give input.

Shawn: Can people please update their participation?

Brent: In order to comply with my company regs for sponsoring and in order to choose a room and menus for the venue I really must have an accurate count - please do that today!
... any other ideas for what to work on/consider for the agenda, please feel free to add to the list on this page. Any other questions about the meeting?

ARRM update

<Bill> +present

Denis: We are about a week behind in terms of original planning. We have completed the first two docs that we want group review. For context, we need feedback in order to do the presentations we have planned for CSUN and AccessU. We want to share a mature draft on a stable URL and want to be sure EO is able to provide the feedback to improve it.
... so to look at the docs, the roles are defined generically and for each it is from the persepctive of accessibility.
... the second doc is the framework for the decision tree, we have learned from your comments last year. We have defined three levels of ownership. We would like EO to read through the framework to see if it makes theoretical sense and next week will come back with a proof-of-concept excercise.

<yatil> @@@ links to all those pages

Denis: The idea is to get EO input, present at CSUN, get publis response, integrate comments and present again with updates at AccessU

Brent: Doing these iterative excercises will be valuable. So as we look at these two documents, is it OK to post and reachable witht he understanding that it will not be announced and reachable through the nav. The reosurce is in its permananet place but is a work inprogress and not "published"

Denis: We have it in a place where we are finished and would publish as a first iteration. So we are able to live with this version but expect it will only be improved by your input and public feedback from these presentations. Then our focus will move to the matrix now that the framework is stable.
... from this point any improvements will be based on EO and public feedbback.

Shadi: Congratulations on this good work, it is excellent. On the course we just completed, we had to be careful about linking but were very eager to see it done. The apporach I was aware of was that it would get group review before releasing to the public. In this case, I feel that EO did not have a chance to review recently.
... I am wondering if we are comfortable as a group releasing it, I guess that it will be marked as a draft.

Denis: Leaving it unconnected from the navigation seemed like the way to make it clear that it was not a final version.
... want to go a bit faster

<Zakim> shawn-vacation, you wanted to say [!!] must be addressed before posting, [ED] to be addressed now or later

<Zakim> brent, you wanted to say about WAI engage

Shawn: Step back a bit. The issue that they are presenting at CSUN. The planning team discussed that since it will be getting atteniton, it is better to point to the real URI rather than the temp wiki page. Chairs did not want to publicize "Draft" versions. They were compfratable based on the intent. The question is now is the group comfortable with it?
... the proposed schedule is tight and now we are behind even that proposed. So EO Is welcome to make the call - if it is too tight, we could make the decision not to do it.
... you can mark your comments as [!!] must address before posting or [[ED]] can adress before posting or after

Kevin: I am latr to this, how much of a risk is the re-direct. If we present it as a work-in-progress and leave it on the wiki, is that OK? I would like the opportunity to read through and comment before it is posted as a doc.

<Zakim> yatil, you wanted to say redirects

Sharron: I would also prefer that an unapproved doc not be posted as a draft. I have been persuaded by the planning team to consider an exception in this case. I agree with Keving that the risk of using the wiki address is less

Eric: There is custom design in the wiki that will have to be considered. Could use a short redirect to the wiki page and that would not break anything. I also have reservations of posting something to WAI that hoas not been thoroughly vetted.

Laura: I have spent quite a bit of time with the resource, I feel perfectly comfortable having it on the WAI site. I understand the issue and could go either way. Given the time we have spent doing the excercises both here in the group and in the Library where I work, ti is mature enough to instill confidence.

Helen: I've not seen anything of these documents yet. I cannot see either way if it is OK. We should have a review this week and determine next week if it is publishable as a draft. Can we postpone this decision and make it next week when we are more informed?

<kevin> +1 if possible to have a quick review

<eoncins> Yes Helen I am in the same boat :)

Sharron: There is also the issue of the design work - who is going to do that to get the resource posted and operable in time for the presentation?

Brent: We understand that we are a bit behind schedule.
... the question them becomes to do a redirect from the wiki in order to avoid confusion or how to get it ready. The preso at CSUN will happen. It is a question of whether we want them to present it on that platform or are we comforatable enough to post in a WAI page design?

<yatil> Brent: We also need to see how to implement it on the site.

<brent> Scribe: Yatil

Shawn: I think it is rather unrealistic to get it on the WAI site in time.

<dmontalvo> +1 sounds reasonable

Kevin: So that answers the inital question.

Denis: It won't change what we do at CSUN, if we can set up a redirect that would be good enough by me. I live in a world where we do stuff and then fix things, different than the W3C process.

Brent: We need to get you to a place where the group is comfortable to publish it on the wai site. As it is then officially endorsed by the group.
... understand that this was your intent, but we just fell behind.

Shadi: This is just the sign-off process at this organization, there were several delays, so it just gotten unfeasible. I personally don't feel comfortable, that's not a critique but let's find a compromise.
... Maybe a coming soon page?
... Try to brainstorm for a solution.

Sharron: If Denis and team are happy with the wiki for now, I support the redirect option. We still have the same opportunities for review and comment

<dboudreau> just to be clear, we ARE very happy with whatever solution the WG feels is best

Brent: I don't like the 'coming soon' page, a redirect sounds better to me.

Sharron: ...and we have shared works-in-progress in wiki form previously so there is precedent

Brent: are you comfortable with that?

Denis: I'm comfortable with whatever the group is comfortable with.

Brent: Let's open the survey so you get feedback for csun!

Denis: We want to look at as much EO feedback as possible before we publish so in terms of the process itself, there are limits. But clearly whatever comments we can address before that we want to. But EO process takes time and can get complicated so trying to find consensus within this timeframe may not be feasible.

Brent: A lot of this unfortunately is a matter of schedule, Eric's travel time, other duties, etc. So if we are mindful of the redirect challenge we can have a bit more breathing time.
... this way we can gather input from this group before CSUN and bring to the public in the presentation and more in depth work at our F2F. With all that input, we can make the improvements and have another round of review before publication on the WAI site.

<shadi> +1 if survey ready, great!

<dboudreau> +1 with all the Brent just said

<kevin> +1 to Brent's plan

<krisannekinney> +1 to Brent's plan

Sharron: Agree and given that some current participants haven't ever reviewed it, should take advantage of that first exposure. Some EOWG participants haven't seen it at all. EOWG as a group hasn't really looked at it in a year.

<Helen> +1 to the current plan of redirects

Denis: I am looking forward to seeing this on the WAI site and am confident it will get there eventually. Whether it is on a wiki or the page, the CSUN will be the same preso. I hope we will do the reirect rather than an under construction page (very 1995) having a stable URL is important.
... one of the options we spoke about at the planning meeting and I think a stable URL is important.

Shadi: So we are saying, there will still be the survey on ARRM (maybe this week). The docs will remain on the wiki with the disclaimer that it is a work in progress. There will be a permananet URI that will be redirected to the wiki for now. Is that what you are proposing?

Brent: Yes

Shadi: Do you have a timeline of when it will move from the wiki to the final page?

Denis: Hoping now that it will be before AccessU in May.

Sharron: We as chairs will commit to expediting the process

Brent: After the Thourough Review and we get final comments, we can work the process and get Approval.

Shawn: I will address the URI and redirect issue next week -- taking this input from EO.
... and if we have other questions that EO can provide input on, we will come back with those.

<Helen> could we get a link to the pages now?

Brent: Any other comments or questions?

Helen: Can I get a link to the pages now? My interest is piqued.

Brent: Linked from the refreshed agenda

Denis: You start with the role based decision doc which will link as needed. The support information only makes sense from within the framework.

Brent: Will the wiki be taken down?

Denis: I think it should be.

WrapUp

Shawn: KrisAnne took the MOOC course, found it useful and encourage others to take it and Module 1 was a good way to introduce it. Wide range of people taking the course and mostly very positive feedback and have been answering questions in a blog.

<shawn-vacation> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Promoting_W3Cx_Intro_Course

Shawn: course if free to audit or pay for a certificate.

<eoncins_> I have already promoted also in my university and some people is taking the course

Laura: I have spread the word at the Library and people have signed up to take it. I was thrilled

<eoncins_> I will be delighted to help you on translation Shawn

Shawn: And we are changing it as we get feedback from attendess.

Brent: THere is not a survey today but will get one out as the questions for the ARRM work are finalized.
... thanks for everything today, good discussion, have a great weekend.