– DRAFT –
Accessibility Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG) Teleconference

Description of Visual Information

<krisanne> https://content-author-modules--wai-curricula.netlify.app/curricula/content-author-modules/multimedia/#topic-description-of-visual-information

Kris Anne: Please review the work that Shawn and Daniel have doen to make the descriptions more consistan.

<krisanne> https://deploy-preview-191--wai-media-guide.netlify.app/media/av/description/#introduction

Shawn: We'd like folks to look instead at the media resource and review how we have landed on our apporach - we'd like a review and approval from the group or feel free to raise other issues.

<shawn9> Sharron: msince this is guide to complex situation, not as important the be succinct , this is important to be clear

Shawn: it was not clear the distinction between various scenarios and so this is a bit more wordy, want to be sure it addresses the nuance of these different scenarios.

Sharron: It is more improtant to get the detail and disctinction than brwvity in this specific case.

Michele: The long description seemed to raise more questions to me but I see it is addressed below. Perhaps no need to raise it in detail in the intro and then find more about how to below. Maybe the intro should just address what is audio description and the how to later on.

Kris Anne: The purpose was to bring the two resources into alignment, right?

Shawn: The Media Resource tried to be more succint and it became clear that it was not enough and was not fully aligned with how it was addressed in the Curriculum.

Laura: I agree with Michele

KrisAnne: When it comes to media AD is the one aspect that is most confusing to people so it does not seem too much to me.

Laura: Maybe it needs less in the intro and a more about what it is

Michele: Yes it is important to set the tone and for an unknown topic, it is too front loaded about technical aspects and may need to be conceptually introduced.

Laura: Put the tech detail into another section with an additional header

<krisanne> https://content-author-modules--wai-curricula.netlify.app/curricula/content-author-modules/multimedia/#topic-description-of-visual-information

Shawn: Let's look now at the curricula approaches it.

Kris Anne: It does feel different in this context guiding people who are creating course work.

Shawn: Yes in the curricula it is focused specifically on authors and how to tewach them these technicaues.

Michele: It seems fine here, it matches (and already did) match what is in the Guide.
… not sure wha tthe discropancy was, but seems aligned now.

Daniel: Wanted to make a clear distinction between description that is and is not integrated. We were using words like "separate" and the words we used for that were not the same in both.

Shawn: First reaction is that this level of discussion may be sufficient for the Curricula but not enough for the Media Guide. Trying to process the fact that it is an improtant and complex issue so it OK to have detail up front vs Michel and Laura's point that the complexity shoudl not be up fromt but expaned on below.

Laura: I think our point is not that there is too much info but that it is not named properly by calling it "Introduction"

Shawn: Not quite when I look at the parralelism with the other sections of the Guide

Laura: Intro may need to be a short summary of the page content and not technical guidance right off the bat.

Shawn: When we have an exisiting resource we want to balance between tweaking what here and full scale rewriting.

Carlos: I think Daniel has it fine for the curriculum. What is missing a bit from the introduction is a sense of overview. The information is good and I think what it is is correct for an intro but the how is likely not needed here since it is explained in detail below.

Sharron: +1

Shawn: Looking at the other resources, we try to expalin what the topic is and what the different options are. It is a very detailed and specific resource.
… so for example, a company we know failed an audit due to lack of separate audio description track when in fact they had integrated AD brilliantly. So I think it needs something here to make the point.

Sharron: Can you not just say there is more than one way to do so and the detail stays below?

Carlos: Yes

<dmontalvo> to say maybe/maybe/

<shawn9> previous version: https://www.w3.org/WAI/media/av/description/#introduction

Michele: Why can there not be less technical detail about how the different options are implemented in the intro. The way it is presented I expected the tutorial to immediately follow.

Shawn: We had to change the wording for alignement, but could perhaps return toa bulleted list.

<krisanne> ach mi

<Zakim> dmontalvo, you wanted to say maybe just for media resource intro it's worth just saying "integrated verrsus not integrated" and then expand the details down below

Daniel: Hearing concensus that people are happy with the 3 bullets but the issue came up due to dissatisfaction with the word "narrative" among other things. Perhaps make the disctinction between integrated and nonintegrated in the inbtro and leave the details for below.

Sharron: I like that idea.

Shawn: Thanks for discussion will take back to the drawing board

How to Make Remote Meeting Accessible

KrisAnne: Wanteed to look at some minor changes recently made and give you the opportunity to review and comment.

Shawn: It was "How to Make Presentaion Accessible" and we want to add meeting to the title, clarify in summary that it applies as well to remote meeting. Changes are in process, wanted to get your comments and be sure you are feeling good as we continue to make updates and changes.

Michele: Do we use GitHub to comment?

Shawn: Usually we discuss and then publish. In this case we published and want to be sure we are all agreed. If it is a point for discussion, please feel free.

Michele: Added in person and remote to headings, and seems unecessary since all of these are relevant to both types of meetings.

Shawn: One of the issues is that in teh past, most thought it only applied only to in person meeting and we want to make the point that as you noted, most of the points apply to both.

Michele: OK but there are some that are marked as only one type but actully apply to both

<shawn9> different style : https://deploy-preview-76--wai-presentations2all.netlify.app/teach-advocate/accessible-presentations/

Shawn: I agree it is clutering and increased the cognitive load. If you see how it is when styled differently, does that help?

Michele: Agree

Shawn: Any objection?

Kris Anne: No it makes it easier to read.

Shawn: Can someone volunteer to update the code to do that?

Brian: I can do that

KrisAnne: In looking down the agenda, we have an item about titling and could this help - rethinking the title?

Shawn: We can get the visual design fixed, we can tweeak the inperson and remote easily. But if we look at the content and think about retitling/rebranding it we really need to do an edit of the entiure resource.
… it would be a bigger task
… for now any other comments on these quick changes?

Michele: I think we do need to do that full edit. And if they only go by the headings, they will leave out some aspects that apply to both.

Shawn: Agreed but in the meantime we need to clean this one up and address those issues that are obvious.
… so for today, we will fix the heading style, Michele will comment on the items that apply to both, address open GitHub issues...

Remote Meeting Platform

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/pull/74

<shawn9> github-bot, bye

<Vicki> +1

<CarlosD> +1

<Laura> +1

<krisanne> +1

<MarkPalmer> +1

<shawn9> +1

<Michele> +1

<BrianE> +1

Sharron: +1

No Seizures

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/pull/72

Shawn: Current resource mentions motions and animation and we just added a bit more detail.

<BrianE> +1

<Vicki> +1

<Michele> +1

<CarlosD> +1

<krisanne> +1

Sharron: +1

<shawn9> +1

<Laura> +1

Use simple language

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/pull/73

<sylvie> +1

<Vicki> +1

<CarlosD> +1

<Laura> +1

<BrianE> +1

Shawn: Moved it into "Preparing your slides" and added a bit.

<shawn9> +1

Sharron: +1

<krisanne> +1

<Michele> -1

<sylvie> +1

Michele: Use simple language also applies to speaking - I don't understand this.

Shawn: Since we moved it to prpearing slides I also wanted to avoid duplicating and so added that.
… how about "also use simple language when speaking during presentaions and meetings"

Daniel: I think we may want to use a qualifier "if you can, when possible" something like that to acknoledge that sometimes it is not possible.

Michele: Why is moved to Preparing Your Slides?

Shawn: To avoid putting complex language into the slides.

Michele: Even if I had a jargony word, I may put it on the slide and be prompted to explain it. Not sure it belongs in the section on Preparing Slides

Shawn: I see slides that are full complex sentences with idioms and jargon. I see such bad sducments.

Michele: I still feel that it is better in the previous section where it was/

Sharron: I agree

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/issues/31#issuecomment-1192094216

KrisAnne: I know you want to avoid duplication but to remind people in a couple of places about the same point.

Limit Text on Slides

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/issues/31#issuecomment-1192094216

Sharron: Is it necessary to prompt them to provide handouts?

Shawn: Can tweak that

KrisAnne: Can we add something about not having many bullets and several sub bullets on one slide?

Daniel: If you say "limited" it feels like a limitation right? Maybe find another word?

<Vicki> +1

<MarkPalmer> +1

<Laura> +1

Shawn: How about this rewrite (read...)

<shawn9> +1

<krisanne> +1

<BrianE> +1

<Michele> +1

Sharron: +1

<Vicki> +1

<CarlosD> +1

Simple Language

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/pull/73

Shawn: Refresh Issue#73 - OK as is or need change?
… if possible would liek to leave and if issues arise we can add later as a GitHub Issue - OK with everyone?
… hearing no objection will do.

No Background Noise

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/issues/24#issuecomment-1192085690

Michele: How much are we trying to rewrite these rather than point to consideratons for remote/in-person? Seems like quite a bit of mismatch at this point, needs a rewrite IMO

Shawn: This is temporary so when we're adding a new thing go ahead and comment and as for existing content, only really serious issues

Michele: Music waiting rooms would not be background music
… are we instead saying for in person meetings we want to eliminate distractions, maybe less volume for background music but what other kinds of distractions?

Shawn: I am torn between leaving as a placeholder to add other distractions and just changing to background noise.

KrisAnne: Lends itself to the background noise aspect and can add others as they occur to us.

Vicki: Phones and popup notifications.

Shawn: What about visual distractions? Like someone walking people behind the speaker, etc. Will consider all this and rework. Thanks.
… add any others to Github

Materials ahead of time/screen sharing

<krisanne> https://github.com/w3c/wai-presentations2all/pull/75

Shawn: Slides shown during a screen share ae not accessible

Daniel: May want to soften the language since there are platforms that can share materials in a more accessible way.

<Vicki> +1

Shawn: (reads rewrite)

<krisanne> +1

<MarkPalmer> +1

<Laura> +1

<CarlosD> +1

<BrianE> +1

<Michele> +1

Sharron: +1

<shawn9> +1

WrapUp

Shawn: may do a survey to get final support

KrisAnne: We have both surveys still open
… Will update work for this week, include the surveys and hope all have a great weekend.

<shawn9> rrsaagent, make logs public