<shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Meetings#Agenda

<shawn> Chair: Sharron

<Sharron> Scribe: Jade

introductions

Introduction to Steve Lee, newbie

authoring tools list

Steve new to the project, working through the information to date

<stevelee> https://github.com/w3c/wai-authoring-tools/wiki/schedule

<shawn> draft: https://wai-authoring-tools.netlify.app/authoring-tools/ survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/auth-tool-3/results

scribe: next up is to go through the survey results.

list of courses

<shawn> draft: https://deploy-preview-7--wai-list-of-courses.netlify.app/list-of-courses/

<LeticiaS> https://deploy-preview-7--wai-list-of-courses.netlify.app/list-of-courses/

Leticia, overview of updates following survey

Updates to the presentation/format, results ordered alphabetically, ordered by date updated

renamed certain attributes, included new filters

scribe: advanced filter to be added later
... Next survey is currently being prepared
... please comment (those who responded to the last survey)
... disclaimer at the top of the courses list about non-endorsement by W3c
... as well as a disclaimer box at the end of the page

<brentb> Disclaimer box issue: https://github.com/w3c/wai-course-list/issues/11

<shawn> current draft wording: "Note: offers are user-submitted, not W3C-endorsed, see disclaimer for vendor-submitted content." current disclaimer box: https://deploy-preview-7--wai-list-of-courses.netlify.app/list-of-courses/#disclaimer

Steve, cannot see anything missing from the disclaimer

Michelle, where should we respond to issues?

Leticia, Github/email fine

Sharron, likes the emphasis of the box, doesn't feel strongly

<kevin> +1 to Sharrons comment about potentially missing the comment

<CarlosD> +1 to Sharron

Judy, understands that WAI/W3C doesn't endorse products/services. Line up top is succinct, agree with Sharron about the extra info in the disclaimer box

+1 to judy

scribe: The level of detail in the disclaimer might save questions later on.

Brent, the box gives additional and important information

scribe: suggest leaving it there

Sharron, unobtrusive placement, yet still visible, doesn't take much room.

More yellow boxes! :)

Daniel, supports keeping the disclaimer box

EO discussed the sentence at the top of the page and keeping the additional disclaimer in the yellow box further down the page

<Sharron> +1

<dmontalvo> +1

<LeticiaS> +1

<kevin> +1

<Billie> +1

<MarkPalmer> +1

<shawn> +1

<CarlosD> +1

<brentb> +1

<Michele> +1

+1

<stevelee> +1

Leticia/Carlos: nothing else to discuss at the moment, waiting for any extra feedback.

audio and video media

<shawn> Reminder to reply to e-mails from Leticia

Audio and video media resource, descriptions page:

<brentb> https://www.w3.org/WAI/media/av/description/

<shawn> straw proposal: https://github.com/w3c/wai-media-guide/issues/182

'Description of visual information is called audio description, video description, or described video in different areas.' could be confusion about the terminology for audio description

question is using the terminology for description throughout resources, consistency, and matching with curricula

Also need to make sure all groups agree on terminology to use

Shawn, informal user research conducted, audio description confusing as people think it's about describing audio, video description was more understood/understandable

worldwide, audio description might be more widely used

Proposal on Github issue 182

Judy, this debate has gone on for a while, one suggestion could be 'described video'

scribe: succinct and friendlier than audio description

<shawn> [ Shawn notes "described video" was considered e.g., in https://github.com/w3c/wai-media-guide/issues/75]

Kevin, for described video, described by what?

scribe: also, there's a logo for AD, who owns it?

Shawn, audio is one way to provide description, it could be text

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to note not just audio

scribe: most people produce audio description, but this could move to text more in future

<Sylvie> audiodescription is used for describing theater, movies, television events, more than the web

Sharron, AD as a term has history, but how this applies to the web is the remit of W3C

Shawn, does the group want to approve the final decision before updating the document?

Sharron, suggest putting it in a survey

<shawn> nav - Description

<shawn> title - Description of Visual Information

<shawn> first sentence - ...description of visual information, which is also known as audio description, video description, or described video...

<shawn> throughout just "description"

<kevin> +1

<Vicki> +1 for the sentence

<Billie> +1

<stevelee> +1 - clears up both confusions - what is be described (visual) and in what mode (not specified)

<brentb> +1

Sylvie, this should be explained using a glossary

<Zakim> brentb, you wanted to say glossary

Shawn, will look into this, not sure if it's needed as it's explained throughout the page

Brent, there's a larger WAI/W3C glossary in progress, could it be included in there?

Shawn, glossary has been de-prioritised

Kevin, there is a description of the terms, but isn't called out explicitly.

<Sharron> +1 to kevin's suggestion to call out defintition more clearly

<Vicki> +1

+1

<Billie> +1

<brentb> +1 to Kevin

<MarkPalmer> +1

<Sylvie> Abstain

<Sylvie> Need to look at it in the context

Vicki, not comfortable with just description, feels it's a bit bland

Sharron, agrees that it's vague

Brent, is the description page specifically about teaching people how to do AD?

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to comment on pattern

Kevin, the structure of the page isn't consistent, so it might not be a big issue.

Shawn, is redesigning these 4 pages a priority

redesign how we break up the information into a format (who, what)

On the description page or in the entire resource

Vicki, would it be problematic to change the title to description of visual information

<Sylvie> Sorry, I have to leave the call, have a good week-end !

Kevin, if we take out 'audio' we need to make sure it's detailed somewhere on the page

Shawn, if we can change the heading from introduction to 'what are...' or similar

scribe: do we want to vote or is it ok for the chairs to take this away to discuss.

<Sharron> Proposal is to remove "audio" from resource title, modify headings to call out definitions of terms, and use "description" throughout,

<Vicki> +1

<shawn> heading issue - https://github.com/w3c/wai-media-guide/issues/184

<kevin> +1

<Sharron> +1

<Michele> +1

<CarlosD> +1

<Sharron> Jade: Will you keep the AD loge next to the title?

<Sharron> Jade: I think the AD logo is quite helpful

<brentb> +1

<shawn> +1

Proposal good to go.

work for this week

respond to Leticia's comments if you need to

Outreach

Announcements, share news

Nobody has anything, we'll have the time back! :)

<Sharron> trackbot, end meeting

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Carlos, nothing/Carlos: nothing/
Succeeded: s/+1 to comment on described video, and to ask about logo//
Succeeded: s/defintiutions /definitions /
Default Present: shawn, LeticiaS, stevelee, Daniel, brentb, Judy, Jade, Michele, MarkPalmer, kevin, Sharron, Billie, Sylvie, CarlosD, Vicki
Present: shawn, LeticiaS, stevelee, Daniel, brentb, Judy, Jade, Michele, MarkPalmer, kevin, Sharron, Billie, Sylvie, CarlosD, Vicki
Regrets: Laura, Estella
Found Scribe: Jade
Inferring ScribeNick: Jade
Found Date: 01 Oct 2021
People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)