<scribe> Scribe: kevin
Brent: There has been some fine tuning of the wording around the ACT rule field.
<shawn> ( Pull Request for background and comments if needed : https://github.com/w3c/wai-evaluation-tools-list/pull/79)
Brent: If they have done an
implementation then they can add a link to this.
... We also want to try to explain ACT rules and ACT rules
implementation for those that don’t know.
... Are there any more comments on the language being used?
krisanne: Is this going to be a checkmark that they have a report in the filter?
shawn: Yes
krisanne: I think the wording is nice and simple and to the the point
RESOLUTION: Accept existing wording for the ACT rules implementation report
<Jade> +1 language much clearer than the last version
<krisanne> 1
<Laura> +1
<krisanne> +1
<shawn> +1
<Brent> +1
+1
<MarkPalmer> +1
<daniel-montalvo> +1
<Vicki> +1
<Michele> +1
Brent: We want to highlight that ATAG is for LMS and other tools and that people who create those tools should be aware of those guidelines.
<daniel-montalvo> https://github.com/w3c/wai-intro-atag/wiki/atag-briefs-requirements-analysis -> Requirements analysis
Brent: We are looking to create short pieces to highlight this.
Shawn: The goal is to talk to
tool developers with the goal of helping them understand that
their tool should meet ATAG, that it will help them and that it
will be relevant.
... The briefs will seek to be written using their terminology
to bridge the gap between ATAG and their language.
... The requirements analysis is really just to capture what we
are looking to do.
... Any question on the requirements?
Michele: One use case that might be missing is website developers that create tools such as Wix?
Shawn: We could add this as a possible one. Daniel does this need discussion?
Daniel: I am not sure that we
should add this given that any website could be used to upload
content.
... This might introduce some confusion. The goal with this is
to consider specific content authoring tools such as LMS or
CMS.
... I could add if people really feel it is needed.
Shawn: Could list it as a possible. But just to clarify, Michele is talking about authoring tools that are used to create websites.
For example, Wordpress, Wix
Michele: Yes. This has relevance for example to disabled business owners who want to create a website but the tools may not work for them or produce accessible content.
Shawn: I think everyone is in agreement to start with Education.
Michele: These are called no-code tools which might include something like Dreamweaver.
Shawn: Coud we just tweak to say we are starting with Education and then two from other options and add in no-code as an option.
Daniel: Yes, we could add this as an option for future ideas.
Shawn: We are not 100% that social media will work out as a great option. This might be a better alternative.
Michele: I am not sure I understand the ‘Publishing’ one
Shawn: Basically ePub tools
Michele: So something about the ePub tool not being accessible as well as the tool creating accessible ePubs.
Shawn: Yes
... This is where having more options might be useful as we may
not have enough domain knowledge.
Michele: If we are looking to prioritise areas where this is missing, then ePub may not be one of those.
Shawn: Tweak requirements to say that we are starting with Education and then we will explore other options from Publishing, Social Media or no-code tools.
<Jade> +1
Shawn: Other than that are we ok with the requirements analysis?
<shawn> +1
<Vicki> +1
<MarkPalmer> +1
<krisanne> +1
<Michele> +1
<Brent> +1 to add website development "no code" tools and order.
<Laura> +1
+1
<shawn> https://atag-briefs--wai-intro-atag.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/atag/education/
<daniel-montalvo> https://atag-briefs--wai-intro-atag.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/atag/education/
Shawn: To give some context, this is an Eagle review - that means it is a very rough concept draft. We are not at the level of detailed wordsmithing or anything at that level.
<Zakim> kevin, you wanted to say some of the personas should not be disabled people but lecturers seeking to support disabled learners
<Jade> Or a course administrator
<Brent> Kevin: Maybe add a persona of a lecturer that does not have a disability, but students with disabilities. To draw out the sense of supporting students (someone else) w/ disabilities.
<Jade> or learning designer
<shawn> +1 for first lecture has disabilities, and some others not. focus on supporting students with disabilities
Michele: Is there a place to help people to know what to do if they are running into inaccessible tools?
Shawn: Yes, although the target audience for this are tool developers not tool users
Jade: Personas could include learning designer or course administrators as possile options
Shawn: At a very high level, does this approach work in general?
Brent: This version is well laid out: summary, why this is important, some clear examples and direction to ATAG.
<Laura> +1 to Brent's comments
<Jade> +1
<Vicki> +1 to Brent
Brent: Right now there are four personas on the page. I would worry about adding more. Keeping it brief is good.
Shawn: Are we ok with this approach as summarized by Brent?
<shawn> acl Laura
<Jade> +1
Laura: Agree with Brents concerns. It is a good format and has about the right number of personas.
<Vicki> +1
<shawn> +1
<daniel-montalvo> We can try reworking existing personas based on feedback
<Laura> +1
<Brent> +1 to format and organization
<MarkPalmer> +1
<Michele> +1
Shawn: Jade brough up a point on
different roles within the personas. We don’t have to keep the
existing roles, these can be changed rather than adding new
ones.
... Right now we have four examples. But how many examples
should we have roughly?
<Laura> 4
<Jade> 3. always 3.
<MarkPalmer> 4
<Michele> 3
<Vicki> 3
<shawn> 3
<Brent> 4 personas/examples
3/4
Jade: You could easily swap out of some of the roles without changing much of the other story. But 3 is a good number to present.
<Laura> I don't feel strongly about 4. Definitely not more.
Jade: It might be that there is a bit of overlap that could be drawn into other sections.
Shawn: We could also be looking at which aspects of ATAG we are seeking to draw out.
Daniel: Yes, this is really as a high level approach just to highlight that this applies to those tool vendors reading this.
Shawn: We could have three examples with personas and then list some additional ones as bullet points at the end.
<shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/atag/glance/
Shawn: If people could look at ATAG at a glance and for those familiar with LMS and course development, which aspect of ATAG will resonate most with LMS developers and project managers?
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say (for later) your procurers
<krisanne> +1 to Jade
Jade: Whenever tool vendors are talking about tooling they are thinking about the output not about the actual content creator
Shawn: Is the feeling that most should be Part A?
Jade: Yes
Shawn: If we are going to focus on Part A, what two might you pick?
Jade: Not sure based on just a short read
Shawn: What about Part B, is there one area that jumps out as neglected or done poorly?
Jade: Perhaps the promoting and integrating
Daniel: Are you saying you would take this out?
Jade: No, I really like this one
Laura: I like this format, it is clear and the approach makes it feel doable. I like this introduction.
<Jade> +1 to Michele
Michele: A big one is A3, the tool itself needs to be operable by users with disabilities. This can’t be repeated enough.
<shawn> Michele - A3 Editing-views are operable AND B2 Authors are supported in producing accessible content
<Jade> (+1 to michele for A3)
Michele: And B2 I often have to consider. If I have to use your tool and it prevents me from making accessible content then there is a comingling of legal responsibility.
Mark: A2, A3, B2 and B3 would be
key ones for me.
... A2 is slightly less than A3 though if there is a strict 3
limit
Vicki: I would go for A2, A3 and B2
Laura: The list here seems doable, I am not sure why there is a need to weight some more than others.
Shawn: This isn’t about changing ATAG at a Glance, more about just what can we briefly pull out in the personas.
<Jade> my final vote is A2, A3, and B4 (which is a bit off track with the other votes...)
Shawn: Good to have a general
idea of aspects of ATAG to highlight,
... Approach agreed to representing at least two disabled
users,
... Limit of three personas
... Third persona to focus on designing for a disabled
student
Shawn: Again, this is high level, looking to understand what works and doesn’t work
<shawn> "Accessibility standard for LMSs and other authoring tools"
<daniel-montalvo> https://atag-briefs--wai-intro-atag.netlify.app/standards-guidelines/atag/education/#accessibility-standard-for-lmss-and-other-authoring-tools
Brent: Should ‘Use ATAG …’ be higher up?
Shawn: Yes
... How do we better call out ATAG and how it can help in the
link text?
Brent: Could call out Part A and Part be to call out the difference.
Kris Anne: Yes, this could help people think about it more
Vicki: Agreed
Shawn: If you look at the update, we purposly did not link early to avoid people disappearing off into the detail to quickly.
<Zakim> kevin, you wanted to say heading isn’t clear and needs to avoid using ‘authoring tool’ so quickly
<Brent> Kevin: I think we need to narrow down the heading of this section so it is more direct. Avoid talking about "Authoring Tools" until the very end.
<Brent> +1 to Kevin
Shawn: If you go to the ATAG overview, it links to all the other links. If that is the case, do we want to include them all or just the two summary documents?
<Brent> Remove the Standard bullet.
+1 to just having overview and at a glance
Shawn: Could change ‘learn more’ to ‘Getting started’ to help this.
Daniel: I would agree. Can get to the standard from many other places.
<Jade> +1
<Michele> +1
<Laura> +1
<shawn> +1
<Vicki> +1
Shawn: Proposal is to only link to Overview and At a Glance
<Brent> +1
<krisanne> +1
+1
RESOLUTION: Link to Overview and At a Glance only
Shawn: Would you have some time to bring your domain experience to this?
Jade: If I can, yes
Shawn: As we develop this it
would be good if there were others who might be able to bring
more subject matter expertise.
... For example, Michele, might you be able to provide some
thoughts on no-code?
Michele: Possibly
Shawn: There maybe some others,
for example some of my contacts from Twitter.
... While the target audience is not procurers, I wonder if it
is worth flagging that procuerers may be asking if your tool is
accessible. If we can draw this out it might be helpful?
Brent: Yes
+1
<MarkPalmer> +1 to Brent
Brent: Every vendor we ask says
their tool is accessible and it is not. It would be good if
there is somewhere to point them to to start thinking about
this.
... If I was to draw this out, I would start with an example.
Then in the conclusion as well. And ideally in the introduction
as well!
Kris Anne: Agreed
scribe: Suppliers generally think
about the outputs not the tool itself
... Sometimes the LMS is just the host for other content as
well.
Jade: In terms of the legal observations the focus is on the user not the working tool
<shawn> Kevin: in UK Equality Act will cover employees and internal systems. everytting is covered. it's just where people are focused
Shawn: What would you say to suppliers?
Kris Anne: This is somethign to set yourself appart from other vendors
Jade: Make yourself more competative in the LMS market
Brent: Implementing ATAG is a marketing tool for those procurers looking to buy accessible products
Kris: You can be more confident that when you say it is accessible, it is
Jade: Help your customers meet your legal obligations
Daniel: These could be used as talking points directly to tool vendors
Brent: Learn how to include people with disabilities so you are not excluded as a purchase option
<Brent> Content Repetition issue: https://github.com/w3c/wai-people-use-web-videos/issues/285
Brent: There are three sets of videos. There is a comment about possibly repetition across the Tools and Techniques and Diverse Abilitities and Barriers.
<Laura> done
<MarkPalmer> done
<Michele> done
<Vicki> done
Brent: In some cases some of the
language may be similar or the same as language in other
scripts or sequences.
... Is that ok? One comment from the subground was that the
language in each script was very particular where there were
definitions involved.
... Some of it was verbatim. Should we look to tweak this so
that someone who is watching multiple videos doesn’t tune out
from the repetition.
Jade: It would take a lot for
someone to hear the repetition and consider it off putting. If
this is a new topic to people, I don’t really see it as an
issue.
... That it is written in the same way it will help to
reinforce it, which is really what we want.
<Vicki> ok with repetition
Brent: If you are ok with a little bit of repetition as it may be in there, then could you say?
<MarkPalmer> ok with repetition
<Jade> ok
<Laura> +1 to repetition
abstaining
<Michele> not sure
<Brent> ok with repetition
<shawn> 0 (prefer less. appreciation other perspectives. not a big deal.)
<daniel-montalvo> OK with repetition
Kris Anne: I had to drop off IRC but I would like to see what succinct would look like. I just want to make sure that nothing would get lost.
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say use case
scribe: If we are not sure on how people are not going to watch all of the videos.
Shawn: I envision that most
people who watch any of the tools and techniques or diverse
abilities and barriers will actually watch the
compliation.
... So I would be very aware of the repetition, especially
within a set of videos.
... When people are using in training, then I think they will
use the individual ones through the training session but
probably all off them.
... I think the persona videos are more likely to be
individually consumed.
... This is all an educated guess though.
Brent: So, you would prefer to avoid repetition within a set. If it happens across sets of videos then it is less of an issue.
Shawn: Yes, but just to stress this is just my thought.
Brent: In conclusion, the majority of people are ok with repetition, some might be keen to see what it would look like without repeition, and a few are concerned how it would impact in particular use cases.
<Brent> https://github.com/w3c/wai-people-use-web-videos/issues/78
Brent: In the Perception and Presentation video and pages has references to sign language and symbols. Is everyone ok with the decisions identified in the issue?
https://github.com/w3c/wai-people-use-web-videos/issues/78#issuecomment-1201061169
Michele: When I opened this I was comparing to the written text and there was a mismatch. I would say that this is fine now.
<Jade> +1
Brent: Are you ok with this approach?
<MarkPalmer> +1
<Laura> +1
<Brent> +1
<shawn> 0
<Vicki> +1
<Michele> +1
+1
<daniel-montalvo> +1
Brent: Any other questions regarding video scripts?
Brent: There are a lot of things
in play at the moment and there are going to be a lot of survey
and reviews with quick turnaround.
... Want to just make sure that everyone has filled in the
availability survey to make sure we can plan for good
feedback.
... In order to be able to publish all this material before the
end of the year, we are going to be tightening up the time for
feedback windows.
... Just to remind that when participants join the working
group they are agreeing to providing four hours work a
week.
<shawn> reminder of how to provide actionable comments with priority : https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Participation_Info#Comments
Brent: Based on the demands in
the next couple of months it would be good if you could add the
extra time built into your schedule as the work will be
there.
... Also, just to flag there is a link to Comment Guidance that
outlines level of comments. It will be really useful to ensure
that comments are flagged appropriately as future enhancements
or essential changes.
Shawn: We looked at this to
refresh last week.
... We want to get the submission form for this out as soon as
possible to start gathering data for the tools list to be
published in December.
... The submission form has a tiny user base. In that case the
need for highly polished interface is less important.
<Brent> Authoring Tool Submission Form: https://wai-authoring-tools-list.netlify.app/authoring-tools-list/submit-a-tool
Shawn: The important thing is for
use to ensure that we are capturing all the appropriate
data.
... There will be a survey opened after this meeting asking
about potential missing data, if you are ok with UI changes and
if you are open to publishing.
... This will be open until Wednesday,
... If you need more time, please say as soon as you can.
... Remember you can always complete the survey with ‘I
pass’
Brent: In the survey we will also ensure that we indicate if there is a hard deadline
Brent: There are a couple of
tweaks to be made and we will send out a link to teh
survey.
... Remember that next Friday Europeans will be off Summertime
hours but US folks won’t be
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/targetaudience/target audience/ Succeeded: s/eaily/easily/ Succeeded: s/at leas two/at least two/ Succeeded: s/UK equality/UK Equality Act/ Succeeded: s/@@/employees/ Succeeded: s/done// Succeeded: s/now say that this is fine now/say that this is fine now/ Succeeded: s/(prefer less , won't push it)/(prefer less. appreciation other perspectives. not a big deal.)/ Succeeded: s/but if you complete sooner that would be great.// Default Present: kevin, Laura, krisanne, Daniel, MarkPalmer, shawn, Jade, Brent, Vicki, Michele Present: kevin, Laura, krisanne, Daniel, MarkPalmer, shawn, Jade, Brent, Vicki, Michele Regrets: Carlos, Andrew, Sylvie, Brian Found Scribe: kevin Inferring ScribeNick: kevin Found Date: 28 Oct 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.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]