W3C logo Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) logo > EOWG Home > EOWG Minutes

EOWG Meeting, August 9, 2002

Agenda for this meeting: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2002JulSep/0051.html

Participants

1. Outreach updates

GD: The Institional Web Managers Workshop attended and addressed by .... (Educational Institutions - UK)
AA: Accessibility Standards being taken seriously by Australian banks (see Access at http://www.bankers.asn.au/ABA/Online/ default.asp?DeptID=21). Other people expressed interest in what is happening in other countries - Helle and Henk particularly. Suggested to put Banking Discussion on a future agenda.
JB: presented at an annual meeting of US Dept of Education NIDRR (WAI funder) - presenters still being encouraged to present in inaccessible formats. JB generated discussion about accessible formats to be used in future. Discussion requested ideas for making PowerPoint accessible to assistive technologies

2. Auxiliary Benefits of Accessible Web site Design

Andrew a couple points on the next one,

Charmaine I thought from the W3C stuff that the main issue is contrast.  It threw me a little bit that this was for the non-visually impaired.

Andrew this is the best for the non visually impaired in most occasionally.

Judy use is instead …Henk?

Andrew Charmaine point c there, when I built …

Charmaine I would really like to learn about that.

Andrew there are some figures about color blindness, do we need to cite that?

Judy I think we should take that out.  We don’t have framework for demographics.  At this point this may be our only statistical demographic document.  We should just toss this.

Andrew toss this statistic?

Judy you can make technical comments about color blindness.

Andrew the reason for putting color blindness is that the audience in Australia most people don’t think of color blindness as a disability.

Judy we don’t restrict our thinking to self labeling.

Charmaine I didn’t have trouble with the color blindness is a good issue to put in there.

Judy that is what we are saying, take out the stat, and keep the color blindness.  Andrew what is the next thing you wanted to discuss?

Andrew number 10.  Yes that should be proper English.

Judy some of this is just responses to her.  Charmaine your comments are great.

Andrew does anybody else have a response there under the markup, which is a brand new issue?  Under 2.1 relative units to markup, …reminders to Andrew which he will turn into English. 

Judy what is the number on her list?

Charmaine 10 b

Judy people understanding the comment?

Andrew read again when I turn into English.

Judy what other issues?

Andrew We suggested we need the references.  Charmaine has raised as questions.  Why we said we need references or substantiation.  I am not sure how to handle that comment and others scattered through the document.

Charmaine I was looking for something that explains how.

Andrew there is nothing in W3C.

Judy I think it just needs one more sentence.  Give it a try Andrew?  Have a dialogue with Henk.  Henk if you have any wording suggestion please contribute. 

Andrew people look in section 2.4 in the original document.  Is RDF commonly understood.

Judy a lot of people would not understand.

Andrew everyone I know just says RDF.

Judy you could say a W3C statement about metadata.  Comments and discussion?  How much explanation.

Charmaine I was thinking about standard format.  I think an acronym is not supposed to start a document.  Putting in Resource Description Format is needed.  You provided a link there but in a normal document you put in the phrase first.

Judy This might be an audience of managers, and marketing that would not recognize this, but a few would have heard about metadata.  Adding a hook there to add meaning to the document would help here.

Charmaine I agree.

Judy when we are trying to figure out how to define, we must think about who the audience is.  Sometimes almost every document has a different audience and we want to communicate.

Andrew item 28.  Can we,... Charmaine has made a possible suggestion as an addition.

Judy lets discuss, …

Andrew Charmaine suggested it is partly a business issue, and partly an employee issue.  I think it a good point, but how to fit in here?

Judy I think an assumption is here, people who do remote work, are on slow dial up.  I wonder when I read this, it feels a little uncomfortable.  It assumes a uniform assumption.  The issue isn’t how many staff members dial up from home, but what the dial situation is.  A high speed dial is standard in many situations any longer is a possibility.

Charmaine in my situation many faculty members don’t have high speed dial.

Judy we might be moving into another part of the resource, and maybe we could take this in advisement and look at this to revise.

Shawn use in the efficiency section?

Judy support for that.

Andrew ok, to take some account under efficiency?  Maybe under the bandwidth issue?

Judy what else is there in Charmaine's Issue?

Andrew I think 30 is discussed by Chuck as well.  Just checking with Charmaine.  Some comment on their comments.

Judy can we have a time check.  We have so much good comment to work.  After Charmaine’s comment, Chucks, then Natasha’s and a new draft from Carlos on the authoring tools document.  I would like to make sure that we get to talk a little bit of Carlos documents today.  And he can devote some focused time to it.  I am thinking we giving so much edits to Andrew.  Would it make sense to switch to Carlos’ documents, and then come back to Chuck’s comments?

Andrew if I could agree with most Chuck’s and leaves for me to incorporate their comments for next.

Natasha, mine were suggestions for changes.

Judy ok so how about we do that, Andrew will react on the list, and others react on the list as well.  We actually stop on this document right, and go to Carlos.

3. Business Case for Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines

[notes on this section from Andrew Arch] 

JB gave background to document development (http://www.fit.fraunhofer.de/~velasco/businessCase.html) and asked for comment.

NL & AA thought it was much improved

GD - clarify 'state of the art' please. CV - what is the latests develpopment in the field that you are preparing an authoring tool for. JB - problem may be that the standards are ahead of the develpopers. HB1 - try 2 parts - status of standards, and status of their product. CV - but this is for the developers, not for tool selectors. JB - try 'implementation status'.

Grace, Charmaine, Natasha & Doyle to read carefully and comment for next week.

CV - please also look at the issues in the changelog (http://www.fit.fraunhofer.de/~velasco/businessCaseChangeLog.html).

[notes on this section from Doyle Saylord]

Let me give a little background on this.  One of two people on this call were not in the face to face in Toronto, or in the tele call.  We had a brief conversation on the document that Carlos was working on.  If you look at the message from Carlos this morning.  The title is a response to the agenda.  And what this document is an effort to create a somewhat parallel to the business case auxiliary.  Rather than to developer something to authors who do development tools.  We want to have a concise business case or construction kit for them to make their business case.  Carlos has been cycling some fairly fast drafts.  In Toronto people had a lot of comments about how to make more concise and clear.  John Richards, and Matt May, and I felt the draft was much much clearer with some changes.  Overall I think the executive summary is much cleaner.  The rest of the document could be made shorter or stronger.  Have others looked at this, can we look at this.  Does everyone understand what the document is about?

Do people understand what the document is about?  Has anybody had a chance to look at the latest update?

Natasha the language is clear the message is clear.  All the explanation about the authoring tools is clear.

Judy other reactions? 

Andrew I would echo Natasha’s comments.

Judy Natasha or Andrew are there things you would like to comment on?

Natasha I haven’t had a chance to look in detail.

Grace I didn’t’ understand what state of the art means?

Judy clarify state of the art, Carlos what did you mean.  Did you mean current situation?

Carlos standard situations, multimedia objects, multimedia, video, smil.

Judy sometimes state of the art has complex meaning.  The latest and best of what is implemented.  What is happening here is ahead of the situation.
 

4. Review Teams & Gallery


JB - updated WAI pages (http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/Review.html) following recent meetings and decision about the direction of this work.

Last revised August 23, 2002 by Judy Brewer

Copyright  ©  1998 - 2002 W3C (MIT, INRIA, Keio ), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply. Your interactions with this site are in accordance with our public and Member privacy statements.