Sharron: Hidde has processed the few minor tweaks needed from the survey comments and will publish soon - thanks to all who completed the survey.
Shawn: Because it was a significant
redesign, we are adding a banner across top warning this will be changing soon. Other some minor changes also. Once the new one is published, we will continue messaging
...Anyone have any other input on how long that banner
should remain? This will be replacing old tool which will be available at different URL.
Kris Anne: question - so if a user starts in old one, can you continue in the new one?
Brent: I would guess that you could not.
Shawn: anyone willing to put that question in GitHub?
Kris Anne:will submit question to GitHub.
<shawn> https://github.com/w3c/wai-wcag-em-report-tool/issues
Sharron:Thanks to everyone who responded - we appreciate your thoughtful input and it makes the resources more widely appleaing and relevant. Daniel has diligently collected the comments and is working through them. Today he wants to discuss some of them and be sure we have an agreed and consistent approach to addressing them.
Daniel: There were lots of comments on the curricula survey - thank you!
<dmontalvo> https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/issues/384
<brentb> Draft Preview: https://wai-curricula.netlify.app/curricula/designer-modules/
Daniel: Wanted to discuss some of the issues today...especially Issue #384 - raised by Kevin. Feels that the current presentation does not talk very much to designers.
<dmontalvo> https://www.w3.org/2021/02/09-wai-curricula-minutes.html
Daniel:We took time before developing the module what courses/topics would be most relevant to Designers and included UX, etc.
<dmontalvo> https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/wiki/Courses-On-Web-Design
Daniel: We did research on some of the courses available on other online learning platforms that are specifically devoted to visual designers. Most addressed combined topics of design and developers. We thought it was very connected.
<dmontalvo> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Role_definition_document#3._Design_Role_Group
Daniel: Wanted to be as much aligned to role definition - the look and feel of the project, etc. What do others think about changing the structure as Kevin suggested? Should we try to address these issues raised by Kevin and others?
Howard: These omments seem pretty general. Would be eaasier to have specific suggestions for language. I'm on the TF and am resistant to change the entire structure at this time.
Daniel: agree it would require extensive changes/efforts that would take significant time. I agree that we may want to ask for more specifics although some specifics were provided in the feedback.
Michele: I also commented and believe the point was to help guide a professional trainer. I don't know how much will have be changed to meet this purpose. I also had some more specific ideas for how to restructure/change. Not sure what we're willing to take on. Maybe a statement that instructors may take and leave what works for them from the curricula we present.
Daniel: perhaps we can find a middle ground.
Sharron: Not sure how much we can resolve without Kevin present. Can Daniel keep Kevin's and Michele's feedback in the back of his mind as they make the other changes and updates based on more specific feedback?
Daniel: Agree that these overall suggestions from Kevin and Michele and others can try to be addressed when making other changes, particularly to structure. Hearing that the group seems to agree that these issues should be addressed, I propose to periodically check in with Kevin and Michele.
Sharron: The tone of Kevin's comments seem flexible and we need to make sure he is on board with the approach.
Daniel: I will catch up with Kevin on his input. There is already a lot of comments on structure.
Shawn: When Daniel wrote his explanation of the chosen topics and structure of course, that seemed to justify the current approach. Maybe we can have a statement that if you are teaching designers who work more with other topics, such as visual design, that you may want to change the content for your course. The idea is that in the intro to the the resource briefly note that it is organized so can be taught with Dev modules and for different audiences and that instructors should feel free to change
Daniel: I will give it a thought on how we can incorporate Shawn's suggestion on overview the page. Will try to incorporate other suggestions also.
Kris Anne: I have always looked at curricula as a guide and that it's fluid and that teachers have the option to change and add to curricula. Hasn't regarded any of these modules as something rigid and unchangeable by the adopters of the curricula. Teachers on going to teach how they see fit.
Sharron: what I took away from Kevin's comment was not so much about structure as that that the presentation of concepts did not speak to designers in their own language or terms. That they would find this content to be more WCAG forward instead of the focused on design concepts.
Kris Anne: I read it differently.
Daniel: will clarify with Kevin his comments. Is it the overall structure or more fundamental. I.e. is it too developer-centric.
Shawn: Responding to Kris Anne's point, what we don't want to happen is that a visual designer looks at this and concludes that this is completely off the mark, that it lacks quality and relevance for design thinkers.
Shadi: Agrees with Kris Anne that adopters of the curricula will pick and choose and change what they want or need. People with different expertise, such as developers, will look for specific key words, topics. Perhaps Kevin's suggestions will help orient the curricula for different audiences but not sure.
Daniel: will start working on specific changes and see if that opens up structural changes to implement.
Carlos: Agrees with Kris Anne that the topics as currently presented seem more WCAG than designer oriented in regards to language. But isn't it the job of instructors to adapt the content as they deem appropriate in language for their known audience?
Sharron: Thanks all for this useful discussion. If there are no furher comments and Daniel, if you feel you have what you need for now, we will move on to the next topic.
Sharron:Leticia has written a survey to gather your response to the preview of a new tools to gather information from providers on publicly available accessibility instruction and classes.
Leticia: The survey will stay open until end of August so you have some time to review it.
<Leticia> https://deploy-preview-4--wai-course-list.netlify.app/teach-advocate/course-list/
for survey is above and on agenda.
<Leticia> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/WAI_Curricula/List_of_Courses
Leticia:First we set some requirements for items to include on the list. This is first review we are not wordsmithing or find tuning. We are looking to understand if
there's anything missing or needing further requirements. For example, format is online, hybrid, etc.
Does anything need to be added/changed. Do we need another page of general information about this
resource? If so, where should this be?
...what is your opinion on the ordering. Or if you have other opinions or comments not asked on the survey, we welcome that input too.
Carlos: is it possible to update some content on the survey?
Sharron: did not see this question but will take a look and make requested changes. The survey is very well constructed and clear. Thank you Leticia and Carlos for this work.
Shadi: excellent work!
Sharron: We have been especially dependent on survey input and resource review in the last few months. With that in mind, we determined it would be useful to look at the various types of review we request from the group and remind ourselves of what feedback is most useful at which point of reseource development. Take it away, Shawn!
Shawn: From an editor's perspective, the role of the editor is to take requirements developed by the group, gather input from participants, and develop or update the resource for group review at various stages. For example, today Daniel addressed input from the survey and came up with a plan for addressing it. This speaks to importance of getting suggestions for major changes early.
...Note that Editor will plan when they will be addressing survey results. If you're going to ask for more time, please do so early so that editor knows to change their planned work schedule. Be conscious of the Editor process. Put comments out there - we really need them - and try to do it as early as possible to give the editor more time to address them.
...Reminder to look at review level and guidance for each review level.
<Sharron> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Participation_Info#Review_Stages_and_Levels
<Sharron> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Participation_Info#Comments
Shawn:Would really like for EO participants to step up and provide thorough reviews. Would like each of you to pick at least a few topics that they you will always follow and review thoroughly.
Brent: A good analogy is product design and accessibility. The earlier accessibility is addressed or considered, the better. the same is here as well
This is how we try to design review stages - big overall questions in the beginning.
Sharron: Since we have a lot of absentee today will need to think of ways to get this word to all of EOWG. Thanks for your help.
Sharron: open surveys, such as user stories, is still open (not on EO survey page - go to work for the week to find)
Shawn: Michele added a mention on our wiki page.
Sharron: Thanks all for your dedication and good work. Have a lovely Friday and enjoy the weekend.