<Brent> Scribe: Brent

<shawn> scribe: Michele

<BrianE> +present

Accessibility Course List

Brent: Had Monkey Review and team has been reviewing those comments...

<shawn> latest version: https://wai-course-list.netlify.app/course-list/

today is review of those comments

Leticia: Presenting the latest updates made to list per monkey review + user testing

<shawn> list of changes: https://github.com/w3c/wai-course-list/wiki/List-of-Accessibility-Courses:-Education,-Training,-and-Certification

Leticia: Changes in taxonomy and attributes...

"Audience" - got feedback it would be a good addition to add "General"

Question for the group - is "General" a good word to use for this?

<shawn> +1 to "general audience"

scribe: Then in "Format" - they changed the order to be "Face to Face", "Online", "Blended", and "Hybrid"...

If you have comments you can say it, otherwise moving on...

Added access key of "F" to jump to "Filters"...

Added "digital accessibility" to the opening paragraph as well as call out box about how they can contact the editors group via email...

Modified disclaimer to active voice...

Had feedback that auto-updating results when you select filters will interfere with screen readers so updated to add a note that "Changing filters will change the listed courses"....

Updated placeholder for "Search" to include more options and be more detailed...

Added more details in the heading that says "Showing X from X courses" when things are filtered...

For expired courses added a note in the individiual "Availability" section on each course to note the course may no longer be availabile

Also had updates on the submission form....

Had a note about pull requests that simplified to just mention GitHub...

For "Country" changed to "...where the provider is located in"...

Question for the group: Should this be "Indicate the country or countries the provider is located in"? Or other wording?

Shawn: Usually don't end with "in" but to simplify wording it's fine not to be technical with English...

<kevin> Indicate which country or countries the provider is located.

Otherwise would need to say "...in which this provider is located".

Kevin: Ending with "in" but is jarring

<BrianE> agree to just removing "in"

Shawn: Yes, not supposed to end with a preposition

Kevin: "In which country or countries is the provider?"

<kevin> In which country or countries is the provider?

Howard: I don't think most people don't follow that "don't end with preposition" ruling anymore

Leticia: Going to change to "In which country or countries is the provider?"
... In the "WAI Curricula" section, they thought these were Module suggestions not something that's already created that they should be selecting...

So added what the WAI Curricula text is in an opening paragraph...

Within "Scheduling", made clarifications if the person needs to be present at a certain time or at their own pace

Within "Platforms", just had input text fields but now have ability to add multiple lines (multiple fields)...

"Availability" - can now have more than start/end date but rather if/when it is available; so now availability "from" and "until" (with option to have not expiration date)...

Updated the button text to say "Review and submit information" so people know there is a review process upon submitting...

When they select Submit, they will see a modal of all their entries that will close the preview or submit it; the button labels in this modal are also updates from prior to be more clear....

In the modal, there's text to explain the review process and timing that's above the buttons but is also at the beginning of the form so people are fully aware of the process...

Once submitted, confirmation page includes note that the information is available on GitHub....

Shawn: Since you mention GitHub, I would want that to be a link so go see the content.

Leticia: It's just machine-readable content so omitted the link

Shawn: Seems like you should either let them know it's just machine-readable or something because people will likely want to see it if you call it out.

Leticia: Maybe does sound good to include so they can know it went well.

Shadi: Perhaps there's a message that says, "FYI, we use GitHub and if you're really curious you can do to XYZ link"

Kevin: May just want to know it's there as confirmation, even if I can't read it

Shadi: Point is just to say it (and make a separate message to call it out)

Howard: Can just put in () that it's "JSON format" which sounds technical so they can decide if they want to click it

<Brent> +1 to Howard

<Zakim> Brent, you wanted to say about updating courses and about submission fail

Brent: Is there a way to communicate that they can edit their submissions to update availability or other parts?

Leticia: Yes, but maybe it's not clear. It's part of the callout on the "List of Accessibility Courses" in the callout box with the email address but maybe it needs to be on the submission form

Brent: Yes, I think it needs to be on the Submission Form...

What happens on error in filling out the form? Do they see the "Something went wrong" page?

Leticia: No, that's for major errors. They'll get form field errors if it's related to data entry.
... That was all the changes but additional concerns we had...

Is 1 month a comfortable deadline for reviewing submissions?

Brent: Have we talked about who are the maintainers of this? Who watches submissions?

Shawn: Leticia's group is going to do it for 2 years.

Leticia: Yes, basic confirmation is me, Carlos does another pass, then Shawn helps with publishing

Shawn: They bring to the team if there's a discussion
... Perhaps put a range for processing time so people don't freak out with saying 1 month

Leticia: Love suggestions from Shadi as well so will likely update so something of this type

<shadi> "We strive to review and publish your submission within 2-4 weeks depending on the content."

Leticia: Other issues included "Export form feature" but this is resolved because now you can get this as PDF...

"Share link with filtered state" was another feature that was called out so will see if feasible

<shadi> +1 to share filtered link!

"Order by Level" was another and planning to have advanced filters so can possibly be included in that

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask about range?

Shadi: On the submission form, what was decision to use an overlay modal rather than separate page?

Leticia: It's easier to port the data, it conveys as a preview to the user (not yet submitted), and if there's a change they can easily close and be right on the form to edit rather than go back to the form on a new page

Shadi: There are accessibility considerations to make modals accessible of course, so need to decide which work to do - the development or for the users

Leticia: So far in my testing with modal is accessible

Shadi: Okay (note: was just wanting to understand the decision).

Brent: Any other comments?

Laura: When approved, does the submitter get an email?

Leticia: Yes. We'll send an email with the JSON file.

Shadi: Maybe worth adding to the message we saw earlier?

<shadi> "We strive to review and publish your submission within 2-4 weeks depending on the content. You will receive an email when we have reviewed your submission."

Leticia: Yes, was thinking the same, we'll want to include (on the Form Submitted page).

Brent: Where are we on schedule? Just did Monkey review and now have a few more changes. So are we now in Approval to Publish with compiled list of changes?

Leticia: I think so (hope so).

Leticia will send an email to Brent and they'll talk about it in the planning meeting.

Shawn: We need to inform other WAI groups so they can comment if they have time.

Shawn and Brent will follow-up to do this with several resources of late to ensure groups are aware and able to comment.

Brent: Fantastic job, looks great, and will be exciting to see the courses that come in.

Evaluation Tools List

Brent: Talk about submission form before Starfish review

Note that Vera is not on the call, Shawn is going to share

<shawn> https://master--wai-evaluation-tools-list.netlify.app/list-of-evaluation-tools/submit-a-tool

Brent: Recall this is a redesign of the current version of this tool

Shawn: Starfish review will be making sure nothing is missing; however, they also want feedback on wordsmith and polishing (will confirm in survey)

Brent: Will receive survey to look at Submission Form for submitting a new tool to appear within the resource....

Want review of the fields that are in the form, make sure it's a complete list...

Not sure if it's a functioning form/page, however, but you can try if you want...

Any questions?

No questions

Redesign with Minimal Header

Discuss consistency issues in Supplemental Guidance ACT Rules; ARIA APG; Understanding WCAG, WCAG Techniques

Shawn: Hopefully subscribed to WAI email list and saw message that team published new designs
... The authoring practices guide group said they were open to rebranding but it didn't get flushed all the way out...

So design compromise was made to meet GAAD deadline to announce the updates...

Supplemental Guidance: https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG2/supplemental/about/

ACT Rules: https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/rules/

ARIA APG: https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/apg/

Looking at creating consistency of the header designs and navigation

Shawn: Note, for instance, in Cognitive Supplemental Guidance there are "Objective", "Previous Pattern", and "Next Pattern" links in the navigation

<Brent> ACT Rules: https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/rules/

Shawn: In ACT Rules, there's currently just "All Test Rules" but will be adding more to follow the patterns

<Brent> ARIA APG: https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/apg/

Shawn: For ARIA APG, one more difference is that the About is in the navigation and not the top banner...

Also doesn't have Previous/Next, so more like tab options across the top

And subcategories are not highlighted persistently in the tab bar...

In Supplemental Guidance, when you use the second bar for navigation (e.g., "Previous/Next") then the "About" doesn't fit as well there as in the topmost header/banner...

So there are UX considerations to note how the page functions and the relevant options while also trying to have consistent looks across the pages...

On Supplemental Guidance landing page, it currently says "All Cognitive" but will grow to areas such as "All Low Vision" (basically to include all the other subgroup guidance)

Laura: I really like the ARIA page. But wondering if "About" can be moved to the left in the secondary navigation bar? Or link Supplemental Guidance and WCAG to the About page?
... On the ARIA page, "About" is the link on the far right but maybe it can move next to "APG Home" to help consistency. Or link "ARIA Authoring Practices Guide (APG)" to the about page?
... Seems like there need to be updates

Shawn: Challenge is that "About" is important for new users but then not useful after their first click. So how do we make obvious for new users but not clutter for repeat users?

Laura: Needs to be there but be consistent. If space is needed, perhaps move "Previous/Next" below the secondary bar.

Zoomed in to see a responsive/mobile view...

Laura: Maybe things should turn into dropdowns on mobile to help

Shadi: Want to echo Laura on where to put "About". I would rather the ARIA design to put About in the second line and separate "Previous/Next" outside of this area. Feels more clear to have a persistent menu.
... Tangent, the Welcoming Home Pages help with orientation (e.g., the ARIA APG home page). Gives an overview and then navigation makes sense. Understand that Cognitive guidance can be deep linked though so need to orient people; not sure solution for that but like the ARIA APG (which can serve as an example for other pages).

Shawn: ARIA is different than Cognitive though; there's no Objective, Previous, and Next for ARIA. (Have looked into breadcrumbs as well, by the way).

Shadi: But in Cognitive it's trying to serve both as a menu and navigation and suggesting to separate these.

Brian: What's the need for "About" to be so prominent and accessible from everywhere? Often it's in the footer, for instance. Or can it be pulled onto the main landing page? Seems can be moved out of the header all-together (esp. for real estate savings).

Shawn: People get deep-linked and then they don't have context about where they landed. So trying to address that - people landing into pages and not being oriented.

Brian: So agree with Shadi that there's a separation and navigation appear below the main menu.

Shawn: We had a previous design like that, notably.

Laura: Agree with Brian that if About is on the landing page and the main title links to the landing page, then maybe that covers it?

Shawn: yes, what if landing page has more clear "About"?

Kevin: Yes, more clear resource pattern in general. There's a landing page, then subpages have another pattern. The inconsistencies across these pages do stand out when looking side-by-side.
... APG has started creating a pattern we might be able to use as a starting point.

Shawn: APG does have an About in their navigation. Also, realistically we don't have the resources to do these types of changes (APG was funded).
... Not sure the priority is high to make these changes, and sometimes different users. It's important to be consistent though (that's why it's on the agenda). But #1 issue is that when people land on a document (e.g., Understanding) they don't know where they are.
... Perhaps more exploring is warranted.

Brian: Every page has a side bar of page contents. Is it possible to add a consistent footer or side bar of "Other useful links"? So have consistency and accounts for deep links.

Shawn: We had a design with sidebar information but was pushed back against. People wanted just "Page Contents" and not combining it with other navigation.

Kevin: So then could separate it between navigation and useful links.

Shawn: This is up high in the DOM so everyone is required to see it.

Kevin: Yes, but right now it's in the header.

Shawn: So why repeat?

Kevin: The suggestion is to take out of the header.

Laura: Yes, would take out of header. At library, we have "Related Resources" that lives right underneath the primary navigation and limited to 2-3 links. We decide the most important related links based on the page.

Michele: Summary of the discussion: What to do with "About" and how Supplemental Guidance is using the second (light blue) bar as navigation between pages versus a tab panel (as in the ARIA APG page).

Shawn: Good discussion and hearing that it needs work though it's not a critical accessibility issue. Since we have these pages to look at we'll keep iterating.

Laura: Really like the ARIA APG template and we should try to modify how we're using "About" on that template to use that for the other pages/guides.

Shawn: Yes, issue is that we have 2 different things - we're putting 2 different types of navigation in the same area.

Minimal Header or List

Shawn: Discussing Eval Tools List, Course List, and Authoring Tools List

Eval Tools List: https://master--wai-evaluation-tools-list.netlify.app/list-of-evaluation-tools/

Eval Tool list doesn't have WAI navigation

Shawn: Eval Tools don't have WAI Site navigation
... For some things that makes since because they'll be in the tool and focused there (
... Was an idea that we'll also have a minimal header...

but at some point Vera presented the case for having the WAI Site navigation for the Evaluation Tools List...

In their user research, they found that when users landed there they needed context...

Also, the Evaluation Tools list is a high entry point, when people search for resources they land there...

The Course List might be another similar case of landing without a lot of context...

The question is do we choose to be consistent (all on or all off) or we can do case-by-case?

Laura: I like the idea of a minimal header and maybe breadcrumb.

Reviewed the meeting minutes from 13 May meeting

Vera said that people were confused by what the resource was a part of or where they could find information.

Shawn: So initial decision last week was to have the navigation, but decisions in meetings are always up for more discussion. Also, do we say the same for the Course List because it's likely to have new users (maybe even more because if we do good SEO and they type "Accessibility Course" we should be high up on the results).

Leticia: I'm in the middle. We didn't have any issues like this in our user testing, but can see the merits. Currently we have the logo and title of the resource but I also like the minimal header. So don't have strong decision either way. Can focus better with minimal options but understand pointing to other resources too (so won't just say "no").

Shawn: What about a Show/Hide to toggle between the headers? (Brainstorm) May not be worth the work but just throwing out there.

Leticia: Yeah, that would require showing the full header first.

Brent: In the Tutorials, we keep the full navigation, breadcrumbs, and side bar for people just dropping in.

Kevin: Likely 2 patterns and then case-by-case (maybe even within a single case). So landing page of EM report tool is full, then goes to minimal as you dive within it. There are ways to have a starting point maybe. And please no Show/Hide (smile).

Shawn: So, to clarify, start with larger header then have minimal as you move through?

Kevin: Yes, like on EM Report Tool maybe there's the full header on the main page and then minimal as you're in the report. But maybe it's jarring. But want to integrate the tools.

Shawn: What would you do for Eval Tools and Course List?

Kevin: Off the top of my head, there's still opportunity to have an introduction page. So it's integrated in the WAI site then a drop off. Doesn't solve for deep link but then maybe there's a WAI link that goes back the main WAI page or the starting point.

Shawn: (Jokingly) Like an "About" in the header?

Laura: Maybe have breadcrumbs with minimal header. So breadcrumbs can show the path and allow going back.

Shawn: Can others comment on minimal header and breadcrumbs?

<kevin> +1 to Laura's general idea

Does it address deep links if we do that?

Kevin: If you deep link, you'll at least have these links that show the information architecture (with breadcrumbs) which provides the context and ability to go to those pages.

Laura: That was my thought as well.

Shawn: Okay, so for Lists we can explore minimal header and breadcrumbs. Maybe not for tools?

Kevin: The tools vary a lot but can still think about a consistent pattern for the headers.

Shawn: Speaking of consistent headers, we can include the "tagline"/"explanatory line" in there (just a comment to think about).

Leticia: Home page of WAI Website, on the right there's a tiny menu that you can expand ("Hide Section" toggle). Maybe we can use that?

Shawn: If you have additional info, just send it in. Thanks for the discussion here.

WAI News

Make sure you sign up for the mailing list: https://www.w3.org/WAI/IG#mailinglist

Work for this Week

Shawn: Lots of reviews coming up. So please update your availability and be prepared to schedule a couple of hours for upcoming EO reviews. We usually say 4 hours a week and that will be highly needed the next few weeks.

Availability: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/availability/

Brent: Emails will be coming with surveys and be sure to set aside time.

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/to discussion/to understand/
Succeeded: s/proposition/preposition/
Succeeded: s/below the navigation/below the main menu/
Default Present: Shawn, Brent, Laura, Leticia, Howard, present, BrianE, MarkPalmer, kevin, Sylvie, shadi, Michele, Estella, Vicki
Present: Brent, BrianE, Howard, Laura, Leticia, MarkPalmer, Shawn, Sylvie, kevin, shadi, Michele, Estella, Vicki
Regrets: KrisAnne, Daniel
Found Scribe: Brent
Found Scribe: Michele
Inferring ScribeNick: Michele
Scribes: Brent, Michele
Found Date: 20 May 2022
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


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.)