WAI curricula

Daniel: The TF is active, we have been having great discussion, have a first draft of Module 1, the TF participants will be commenting and EO is welcome to review as well. A complete draft is ready for review. Will stay in touch to provide updates on progress.

<dmontalvo> Survey on Developing Accessible Content, Module 1, Page Structure

Brent: Comments or questions about that?
... While this activity is targeted for the TF, please feel free and welcome to comment on the survey of you have interest. Also the TF is open for greater participation, if you know af anyone who may be interested, please put them in touch with Daniel.

ATAG Report Tool

Brent: Hidde has modified his approach somewhat, have tried to work out solutions in the planning meetings. Now it's time to bring these ideas to the full group.

<brent> Latest draft of tool: https://atag-report-tool.hdv.now.sh/

Hidde: We realize that some people may know what they are doing here and others may need more guidance and so we have changed the order of the content, added a header similar to other WAI tools.
... The name of the tool has been removed in several places, making it a bit cleaner. Added "evaluate as..." to indicate what standards or levels you are evlauating against. Report has gotten a bit more colorful, green for pass etc.
... On the report page you can edit content now, can change the name of the authoring tool you are evaluating, added executive summary and more. This is the high level overview of changes and we will get into them now.

Evaluation Box

<hdv> github: https://github.com/w3c/wai-atag-report-tool/issues/60

Hidde: Moved from right to left, can start a new report, view one in progress, import one that is saved. We had a pencil button, now called start a new report (which will also cancel the old one). When you have a smaller screen, the box is at the bottom of the screen. All are redundant, you can get there through different means. There is a GitHUb thread going and will now open the floor for comments about this.

Brent: You are asking us to focusing on the Evaluation Report Box at this time,is that correct?

Helen: It looks like the border is too light, can we increase the contrast of the border to make it stand out?

Hidde: Well we can but the previous comments have been that it was too prominent and people wanted it to be less distracting.

Helen: Maybe a 3 to 1 contrast?

Brent: Does the SC apply to this situation? Does the fact that it floats along when scrolling address the concern?

Shawn: Note that there were comments to disinclude the box altogether and that the box itself is not subject to WCAG requirements.

<Laura> +1 to Shawn's comments about the box contast

Hidde: It is a redundant box, we would not lose function to remove it. It would just be more difficult to find and use.

Mark: I don't think having the background adds to the understanding, adding a border would not change that. Adding a border to the grey box may make it too heavy of a presence on the page.

<brent> -1 to thicker or darker boarder.

Hidde: I agree that it becomes too much with an additional border

Kevin: I am one of those who raised the question about what is the point of the box at all. Going thorough elements, not sure the purpose as I understand it justifies the presence of the box at all.
... can allow for something that starts a new report or views an existing one without this persistant box. We've narrowed down on what reporting means. On balance, this is better but in the back of my mind still have that niggling questions - what's it actually for? Anyone else share that concern?

Laura: I have to say I do like the box being there as I am filling out the report and want an easy way to view my progress.

<Helen> +1 to Laura's point :)

<krisannekinney> +1 to Laura

<Howard> agree with Laura

Shadi: This placement on the left works for me much better. But wasn't there a suggestion to do more than simply list how many are left, more of a category summary? I wonder if as it is now there is too little information to really be useful?

Hidde: We have talked about this but I have not prototyped any of that as yet. I agree that we don't want to make it too complex either.

Shadi: Categorize so that navigation was also a bit of a summary broken down into categories. Separating the number so how the aggregated number breaks into categories. Helpful or too much in the way?

Kevin: I think that could make everything a lot more confusing. There is an arguement for it making it more useful within the box. But in the nav it could get messy and confusing.

<Zakim> brent, you wanted to respond to Kevin and Laura's comments

Brent: I agree with Laura, it is good to have it there. Having different ways to accomplish this is useful, also much better on right than on the left. So having it is a good thing but need to be sure that what is in the box is useful and clear and not confusing.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say https://github.com/w3c/wai-atag-report-tool/issues/60#issuecomment-639237835

Shawn: I agree that the box is not absolutely needed but over on the right it is fine, and I'm no longer bothered by it. On the first page it is important to have it there to start a new report. Conceptually it is optional information and OK to fall to the bottom of small screens. But when it is Start New Report it seems it needs to be front and center.
... Also when starting a new report, are we confident that they have saved what was there before?
... should there be a warning that everything will be cleared? Otherwise I am fine with the visual presentation would not want it to be any more prominent.

Helen: I think start new and view is all that's needed. More information can be found within the report. Not everyone will find the progress bar and so I do like to have the box there. Removing it makes the interaction more intuitive. Maybe a "hide" option?
... if it is optional, it could be made more visually prominent.

Shawn: Personally, I love the show/hide since I want to use the full page width and would appreciate the ability to choose that option.

Shadi: This is a great improvement and we have gotten good comments. In the next review I would like to be able to test drive. For now my question (and I can't quite decide) it seems the information now displayed is too little to be useful but I am torn. If instead it was a list that was categorized, the list on the side would be a small table with numbers within categories. Would it be too messy? Because it is does not seem very useful as is.

Hidde: It is dispalyed in that detail on the report page.

Laura: The overview tally or summary would be good in the evaluation box.

Kevin: Yes I can agree if the show/hide option is available.

Hidde: I have not proptotyped with all 60 evluation criteria.

KrisAnne: Yes to find I have 62 out of 63 and not know which one I have not completed. Thinking about how people will skip around to come back after they have found out more. So when they come back, to be able to go back to the exact places they have not completed would be useful.

Hidde: This is a great idea, I completely agree.

Shawn: I support leaving that list on the report. Within the evaluation box, we do not need to know what is passed/failed etc but just what is complete or incomplete with a link to the one still needing to be done. The summary box would then tell you what is done, yet to be done, and provide a link to get to the undone

Kevin: can you mockup what that could look like?

<shadi> A.1: 2 of 4

<shadi> A.2: 0 of 5

<shadi> A.3: 0 of 7

<shadi> A.4: 1 of 4

<shadi> B.1: 3 of 5

<shadi> B.2: 0 of 2

<shadi> B.3: 3 of 8

<shadi> B.4: 2 of 3

<shadi> Total: 11 of 38

<hdv> See Issues/88

Helen: What about an option to export to csv?

Shadi: Brainstorm idea for how to breifly summarize in the eval box to identify where the missing ones are. It ould address the fact of starting to list all of them. The summary may be a good balance.

<shawn> My first reaction is:
1. sort nice, though not needed for MVP (given the summary and links above),
2. download CVS good, though not needed for MVP,
3. Filter not worth the clutter

Hidde: On the page you would have an easier-to-find way to skim for the missing one.

<hdv> 1?

Helen: The reason to have a filer is not to be in addition to but instead of the lists, as a replacement to simplify rather than clutter.

Shawn: I find the list very helpful as an overview. And if it is too cluttering, could by default show how many there are and need to click another button to get the detail. I find the list superhelpful.

Hidde: Expand-collapse might help

\Hellen: Can't expand/collapse everything though.

Shawn: You would see the bulleted list on the report page and a button to see the detail.
... then it could be regular links since it would only display by request

Hidde: Could also use tabs

Editable fields on report page

<hdv> github: https://github.com/w3c/wai-atag-report-tool/issues/65

Hidde: (sharing screen) You can see under the General heading the option to fill and save and you are editing the same stuff that is one the Start screen. Often you will not be able to fill the Exec Summary until you have made progress through the report. Any comments on how this is implemented?

<brent> +1 to implementation

Laura: I love how easy it seems to be to edit, clean it up. Really like it.

<Helen> +1 to liking it

<kevin> +1

Shadi: A question - later down in the table, there is an edit icon - should those be on the fields above as well?

Hidde: It was there but was replaced with the Edit button to align with the Save button

Shadi: I meant shuld we put the edit icon next to the Edit button to indicate that is what is going on later.

Shawn: Leave the edit button and add the icon next to it? First I thought "sure" but then realized that they do different things since the icons below take you to another page.

Kevin: Yes but essentially they are doing the same thing and having the icon there establishes a pattern.

Hidde: Makes me think we may need a Save icon as well if we do that.

<shadi>

Laura: It's clear what it does, not sure we need to overthink it. The edit icon is so widely used, no real danger of confusion.

Daniel: May need to have different names for the two buttons to distinquish between them when found out of context

Brent: I understand that they do the same thing but when you use the Edit button you edit immediately in place. The icon takes you to another page to edit and then will need to navigate back.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to repsond to Daniel and https://github.com/w3c/wai-atag-report-tool/issues/129#issuecomment-639197590

<dmontalvo> +1 to combining these two sections

Shawn: I suggested to combine the sections General and Executive Summary.

Hidde: One reason not to do that is that you can use markdown in the executive Summary

<shawn> -1 to adding icon to the button

Hidde: Thanks for the input, I will update.Not sure where we landed on the iconography?

Shadi: Can we list for later enhancement?

Shawn: Or get to consensus now?

<Howard> -1 to adding icon

<Laura> -1

<shawn> -1 to adding icon to the button

<Mark> -1

Hidde: Do people want to add the icon to the edit box?

<brent> -1

<kevin> +1

<dmontalvo> 0, I am neutral for obvious reasons :-)

<Helen> -1 but is a key needed to explain the icons if there are different purposes?

Kevin: I would like it there but am happy to go with consensus

Hidde: OK then we will not add the icon for now.

Color coding

<hdv> github: https://github.com/w3c/wai-atag-report-tool/issues/93

Hidde: There is some logic to the choices. Green for pass. Green for NA. Red for fail. Orange if you cannot tell. Grey for no result. Blank (no color) for those SCs that are out of scope.

Helen: Would patterned colors be more useful? With hatches or some other visual indicator to allow for color blindness and still provide a visual cue (zigzags, for example)

Kevin: A wee bit too much in my opinion.

<Laura> +1 to Kevin

Brent: I would agree with Kevin.
... the coloring will present a slight difference in tone even for most color blindness. Addiiton of pattern adds cognitive dissonance requiring a legend. Too much complexity for the task.

Shadi: Red and green have sufficient contrast, orange is less than 3 and grey is greyed out so NA.

<Helen> orange and white is never compliant unless the orange is brown

Multi-level SCs

<hdv> GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/wai-atag-report-tool/issues/95

Hidde: On the start page, you can now select SC and within the tool,it will hide any others.
... it is on expand/collapse so you can add specific SCs from other levels by selcting them.
... shows everything in scope and those you add by selection. Extra selector allows you to 'evaluate as'...and choose how it is reported.

<Helen> +1 to looking good

Hidde: Ok? Make sense?

<shadi> +1

<Laura> +1 looks good.

Performance targets

conformance target

<hdv> github: https://github.com/w3c/wai-atag-report-tool/issues/109

Brent: if you select that you want to do target AA and then unhide a AAA it will be included. What if you want to capture it but not include in the report?

Hidde: Would have to do that manually.

Brent: if you specifiy you are doing A report and you have a couple of AA then it is no longer an A level report.
... if you throw other SCs in there,how do you manage expectations to developers.
... I get that you can manually remove but want to stay true to the target.

Sharron: I think in that case, you'd manage it manually. either remove afterwards, or complete the pure Level A report, then separately run the extra SCs and make notes or a bonus report.

Shadi: Came from our experience with the WCAG-EM report tool. People want to kind of take a peek into certain SCs. Wanted to give people options to look at other instances.

Laura: Could edit the target choices to provide the options. Developers only want to touch this once. This way seems cleaner.
... in some situations it is an A level report, so having the flexibility makes it easier for the developers. Could elaborate in the Executive Summary.

Shawn: I appreciate Brent's idea to bring this up. And I agree that whoever is doing the report can manage it. Allowing people to slect and report on additional ones. Potential confusion can be addressed in the Executive Summary with options for editing out as well.

<brent> Okay with functionality as is. Thanks for considering.

Helen: This could be addressed by the csv download option. Maybe this adds to the need for that?

Hidde: Or the JSON version
... thanks for the feedback, it has been very useful. Will get to work on these ideas and report back soon. Hope to put the toolout for survey soon and could be the publication survey in the next few weeks. Talking with different people who work on authoring tools and who may be happy to test drive.

<shawn> ackm e

Shawn: Great work Hidde! I will ask some of our community who are really into to ATAG to take a look at it.

Wrap-Up/WFTW

Brent: If you look at the list, you see there is just a week left before charter time. Please be sure your AC reps have weighed in. There is TF survey on the curricula, can also make GitHub comments on the ART. Anything else?

Shawn: Good news so far on our charter review. We have received 20 responses and no significant comments, so we're looking good. Need comments from Laura's rep and Kevin and Mark's rep.

Brent: Thanks all, have a good weekend.