on this page: morning: morning attendees - UCD process intro - vision, goals, objectives brainstorming | afternoon: afternoon attendees - gallery - joint WCAG meeting - WCAG WG attendees - user materials
Related information:
Shawn's UCD process presentation outline
JB:, We are trying to collect one other visitor. Please introduce yourselves for Dominique (people introduced themselves). We’ll be joined by Janet Daily.
SLH: I don’t know who got what I sent last night. A brief introduction. We are going to talk about a user center design process approaching the web site redesign. The UDC approach EO approach and outside the team. Be flexible in how long we take in the process. After the break talk about vision goals and objectives, and start the first steps, and audience and who we design the web site for. Anybody didn't get the email? I’ll give you a copy. On the site and I could give you. Janet did you get the email? Some time for you during the open discussion you’ll give your thoughts. If you have some additional background. I’ll have a time slot for you before lunchtime. I don’t want to spend a lot of time on the details of the backgrounds. I have linked all the minutes on this issue. We had some on this in Toronto, and October. With that I’ll pass over to Judy. To pick out the points.
JB: so The W3C web site as a whole is maintained by a lot of people. There is not very much of a standard. One of the come back to the general, are you on line, go back to the WAI page. The WAI One thing that is nice about the style of W3C is start and set up the way you want. We inherited, someone was doing accessibility before WAI started and became extremely long with text. As EO as part of WAI to clean up the design a little bit. Repackage a little bit. We went to whole stage of redesign of the home page; take advantage of CSS support for CSS float and browser base and format that we stripped tables excessively for layout. The content still basically was what the EOWG was a better organization that way. We had done the design for months to get this way. The two way stage CSS based, a better organization of information. Get over some of the problems there. The NAV section in the upper right just started that way. We knew weren’t doing that right. The best we could do to clean up at that time. The site nav up at the time and suite nav below that. The page nav there is something we want to spread across more. If you go to the home page more. The stage we wanted to get to in this more customized, come to the site and funneled into where the novice user, and expert could go. Maybe three quarters of a year ago, we decided to go to a user-centered approach. Vydia didn’t stay with the group. But Shawn got even more involved. User centered design ends up modeling the process for other parts ofW3C of many different authors add in their work but still have a unified design. One thing that is very difficult for W3C How many of pages millions a big challenged but a small staff.
HB: you can’t herd cats!
JB: you can put out treats with cats. You can do a lot of things to get cats interested. Develop both the design. And there are some other things going in the rest of the W3C a few things that some people think could be done to improve the web site.
HB: Support
JB: Tim Berners-Lee anybody can write on the page. In the concept of anybody all these different people contribute to this. Very few people have the idea but navigation design and have not aligned well yet. We don’t have the integration yet with navigation and user centered design.
Janetin a communications team debate yesterday one of the things we talked the W3C is being played with one new way or idea that may be exceptional we were talking about looking for best practices. Come out and it would be W3C technology. People will copy with making a mandate. Without valid markup. Dom said that a great example will convince people.
SLH: we want to concentrate on the WAI site. To have positive impact - we will have a challenge with just the WAI site. To make sure we are successful. To talk about user centered design. HCD means Human Centered Design, UCD means User Centered Design. Human Centered Design HCD. I will try to as brief an over view. Ask questions. How many people can raise their hand? Exercise. Can use your arm throughout the morning. Feel free to interrupt. By the way I have some information about our visitors. Janet and Dom. A little bit about User Centered Design. In the last fifteen years come out usability software design ISO standards address usability. A lot of web resources. A poster on the door is a resource. Content developer on that is a colleague of mine. Someone I have worked with for seven years. I am little bit rusty on it. Here is pictorial version. A lot of different versions of this. Same basic steps and techniques. Some differences. A simple one is that the basic particularly where usability is involved design and evaluation are interactive. Actually I have found that analysis is iterative. A very important is to get information up front to learn from. We learned something over time as well. Another way below that is a more detailed view. Horrible view. I will make an SCG at some point.
SLH: I am actually going through each of the stages and the techniques at
this point. Moving right along. Step one analysis. Find the vision goals and
objectives. That is what we’ll do first. When you get people into the
room people have very different concepts.
To talk while we are here face to face. To make sure we know what the site is
about. Help shape and determine what and where we are going. The vision
shaped goal, and we all agreed our vision is X everything that I talk about
is a deliverable has a very specific purpose. And that is one of the
purposes; to make sure we are the right track. Related to that the image of
what we want to project. Challenges and constraints. Make sure that we do
that we brainstorm; I remember some of the techniques we used. I will tell
you some about that.
SLH: Came into vogue with software. The different deliverable user categories list. Go through to get some detailed information about that. What is their knowledge skill they have, what kind of connection? Slow or high speed? Little bitty laptop, huge latest greatest desktop, or hand me down at home. An example of what that might look like. The target audience. E-commerce managers, top-level managers, rate their knowledge the latest and greatest. Example of what the chart might look like. Profiles for selected categories. More detailed information about the main categories. Facts and figures about that category. More a factual part of that piece. Personas or characterization make a characterization for a large corporation, they are this age, and these are the issues they face at work.
CL: similar to how people use the web.
SLH: yes to give you an idea who the user is. How would Wendy Webmaster handle this design? Again with the personas we don’t use for every user category. For the most common categories. For example for someone who is new to accessibility. Easy to forget that what it is like.
CL: don’t you have to test these personas. From how people use the web, colored by particular people use the web.
SLH: when you are doing a very rigorous techniques. We would have two people go out observe and study.
CL: you aren’t just doing that.
SLH: we could talk about rigorous, I have never been able to do the ideal. We have to make concessions. The thing with usability, doing a little bit will help you. Just a quick example, the difference between a profile and personal. Here is profile of this e-commerce manager, spin-off from IT who they report to. The characterization, has a name newly appointed, started out as a cobalt programmer. Personas are fun to do. We have an artist and what their favorite expression is. Fun thing to get a team together and get their juices flowing. Comments?
SLH: the next thing is task analysis, how did they get to the site. Why they here? What is their goal, why did they come to the web site? Sometimes a bit of conflict. They may come for one bit of information and we want them to get something, and these may conflict. A user matrix cross references with your user categories. Certain roles may be going for certain bits of information and that might influence your design.
SLH: information architecture. Basically, the first steps for this is to get a content list. Cross reference with the user categories. Certain user categories access certain information. One of the fun techniques is card-sorting techniques, affinity diagramming. An activity helps you to get to categories groups and labeling.
HB: a technique used with that is sticky notes.
SLH: depends if you horizontal or vertical thinker. Both helpful or fun. Perhaps a web relationship, or hierarchy. Workflow analysis. Not as rigorous as a web application. Have a look. Go through a workflow. Complete the specific task. Workflow defines all the possibilities. You will have an arrow, might also the percent likelihood. Related to that is scenario, which are stories. Workflow and scenario, related in the same way as profiles and personas/characterizations
SLH: Wendy Webmaster got a phone call from and from and from that she has to be accessible. All that is analysis. Again there is a huge opportunity for rigorous analysis. What have to do within the constraints we have in this process.
SLH: We are moving from analysis to design. Talk about design process. Anyone seen the usability iceberg?
JB: interesting how little overlap in this room with usability.
SLH: eventually I will put a little diagram of it. That information we collect directly goes into the design. An over view of what we look conceptually models of the site, navigation design, key thing design for different of styles of navigation. We did some research of styles that we have. Story board and wire frames. Storyboards map out the rough idea of the web site, relationship between pages. Take the design how the web page will work. I am a big proponent of paper prototyping, then medium fidelity prototype. We are incorporating types of evaluations. One of the things is called a design walkthrough. You have a storyboard and a design of your navigation. You have sketches of the web pages. We walkthrough it. I was told to make the web site accessible. I get to the web page and now I want this information and there is not link to the page I want to get to. The beauty of that is that with little investment in the site, you can do this early when you can make changes easy. Couple of the techniques. Heuristic reviews the design at low and medium fidelity against best practices.
SLH: then there is usability testing. From low fidelity to high fidelity. I can point you at paper prototype usability testing resource, and huge range of usability testing. I think it important to do usability testing. I am pretty confident that we can’t do a lot of this.
HB: that would suggest that has a usability button on the site.
SLH: that reminds me of something we want to put on the site. To show the improvement. Do a bench mark of the existing site. And then do the same test to demonstrate the improvement on the new site. Has to be a little bit more formal.
HB: part of our discussion of the gallery.
JB: I think we are trying to capture some of this process, that would be important to capture.
HB: are you suggesting, Janet, we ought to have an education.
Janetthe work we can do in Cannes is sound. Not always the dream of what we would like to have. Love to have things to show other teams. As well as outside. And still be generally appealing.
SLH: I want to open for comments.
JB: I will make one comment. An incredible collection of information. The challenge to select some steps from that to give us at the highest return. To figure what would be finite process rather than infinite.
CC: can you say something about storyboard, and wire frame.
SLH: you would have an arrow from one web page to another. Wire frame comes from the graphic design world. What designers have done is basically make a sketch of the main elements of the pages.
AA: all the bare bones of the pages just with positioning. Logo photograph here, but without color.
SLH: kind of hard to see but kind of alike a wire frame. Navigation button.
CC: holding something on the page?
SLH: projected layout.
AA: you give the wire frame first.
SLH: the whole point to not get focused on details but the whole thing.
AA: storyboard is you want to get here to here.
SLH: sometimes called low fidelity, medium fidelity, and high fidelity.
NL: I am thinking about the process. This is a very rigorous process. You described the process. I am a firm proponent of that process. Get two or three to find out what we are looking. Try to create the hyperbolic chase. For libraries the diagram site of hierarchy way of presenting. An important group can understand the site. The audience text content of that... to work on that. For high-level consultants. I think for us this is important.
SLH: you have a heuristic of the site.
NL: categorization of the content.
SLH: what do you think we could leave.
NL: I don’t know what we could leave. I think we must understand
the grand image.
What are the most important things, and what is the division? You have a
placeholder. You don’t have any visual, so nice to see Judy’s
picture. You can understand a place holder for the communication on the site.
What is the most important piece of that? To test quickly? Accessible
templates. I can tell you later how we import.
Janetwe are going to persuade. Enforce for us not a valid for us. What we need is to show the value. Show the questions we asked and the methods.
JB: Natasha has shown me some interesting techniques that are enforcement that doesn’t feel like enforcement.
NL: we kind of empower all the developers. On the stage where they create the site. We tell them what are the best ways in compliance with the standards; they develop and then send self-assessment. We have an exception process.
DOM: We are using in all the pages. A load validator, the most seen pages on the web site. I think this is a core show. With such guidelines can help a lot in the context of the guidelines. I think if we can come up with some good guidelines, use this tool to assess they aren’t in compliance.
NL:?
DOM: running on the log on the server side.
NL: we use Watchfire to look at all the broken links.
SLH: that is actually is not a conversation we want to talk about now. I would love to have us to talk about that when we have appropriate attention.
[Wireless access goes off and on.]
SLH: What I want to talk about staffing and skills and roles for EO. What we will do. I have found some general recommendations. For a usability specialist. An analysis. A UI designer. Usability people involved in analysis. Good at detailed designed. Interaction designer in charge of conceptual stage. Visual designer is important at goals and objectives. And information architect important.
SLH: Some ideas on roles. One of the things we won’t have the ability to do. We won’t be able to have the entire group on this. To have a task force somewhat like the business case. Which is to have a small team that will do the brainstorming. Come up with each of the deliverables. The larger group can comment on that and review. The entire EO plus some invitees to have a role in that. I haven’t talked to Judy about some outside volunteers. I wanted to open the discussion of this. Open it up to discussion.
JB: I was wondering Dom if you could just mention.... The working group page markup. Everybody else involved in that is involved in another meeting.
Dom: it is a project from a page markup design. Markup creates CSS reusable information map in some way to tables with updates and icon, with all the information for instance the calendar of the information. Put some smart semantics. Reuse more readily. Usability of the web. The semantics of the markup. You can always ask some hidden markup to help with usability. If we do this kind of redesign.
NL: you use any Content Management system?
Dom: one thing that is very important to maintain web sites. Two very interesting history of the site, very interesting point each time that the page is modified there is a note made. There are more and more modifications. You can generate each time.
NL: version controls?
Dom: not content management. We have a collection of tools calledURI a new document from that get HTML validation of that. When you have on any page of the site. When you have we will use if we do some kind of redesign.
HB: how do we track hits on web pages?
Dom: not currently available. A lot of hits on the web page.
JB: there is a few issues on the hit information we can’t know individual hits from individuals users. The other thing is that Matt and I are concerned about. Currently W3C is through Google. The contract allows us that kind of search. Any search data is what we want in terms of data.
AA: we want what people didn’t find.
SLH: lets do five or ten minutes more.
Janeton regular basis we get data. Hits per page or page views. Even loosely estimated I think quality assurance that Dom has as web evangelists. The neat thing is that there is a lot of people on this list they have the right spirit. That is actually a nice place to pick from. Public evangelist. Designers in the web space who get it, or understand what is important and get the message to their peers.
BM: I work with my group that we might use our resources in Wells Fargo.
JB: I am curious about a task force to focus on this. I am thinking of this as a whole in the last year. Pretty much everyone in the group, people are taking on things to work on. It might be some people that aren’t involved in that could be involved in this task force. To drive this.
JB: Andrew you will be still involved in the business case. The business case thing we still have to keep moving on. Do we need to find an organization on this?
SLH: I think we are doing well on this. But first, get some breakfast first. Then come back and see what thought you had and come back and see the vision. Let’s see the agenda, we got through the introduction. Roles take a break and come back. Come back to and constraints. Audience user analysis.
CL: I just had a message from EO list.
SLH: that is great.
CC: I have two virtual resources that I might use.
SLH: There was an idea in Toronto minutes. One comment, someone had mentioned that a graduate student project and brainstorm some more. What are we going to do for more?
HB: a web site that has an amazing thing on it. I’m
SLH: time to eat?
[Back from break]
SLH: we were just talking about user centered design. Proposed approach. Debrief and your thought you thought about. The first stage of the process we thought about. Vision goals and objectives. Wrote a note to myself. Deliverables. Is a term that means a documents for the results. End results of that are deliverables. Before we jump into the visioning. Want to introduce Steve Chief Operating Officer of the W3C web. Make sure we have a common understanding of the rules of brainstorming. NO such thing as a dumb idea to share random thoughts, which trigger an idea from another person. Criticize other ideas yet. Put into perspective. No dumb thoughts in that. Rules
CC: responding to? In some cases you don’t respond to what they say.
SLH: only: What do you mean? Clarifications to elicit further ideas. Encourage more discussion. Evaluate the comments. What I want to do next is pretty good ideas first. Define or clarify those. Everyone share something. Vision goal and objectives. Random anything. Volunteer to start.
Jane:. What my thinking was for results touchstone for web design reference implementation. Ideal is appealing and achieving. The ideal process, which is site design. Not only is the navigation clean. Approved piece of use. Aesthetic, so clearly implement able. Adopting a model is easy to achieve. A role model for good web design.
HB: I like the idea of an audio web site.
CC: audio only?
HB: get my phone on text to speech.
DS: GPS positioning on the web site.
CC: how to clarify how to have things publicly available to us. Some kind of clarification about the site map area. Easy to come on board. To come on board to W3C altogether. Understand WAI. Clear concept of other things out there.
SLH: structure for sites. Do that before lunch.
JB: standard navigation. Throughout the web site. With a complex number of choices. The other thing is audience specific focus on the WAI site. So many different audiences that come to the WAI many technical audience people with disabilities. Regardless of technical background. Fails on that right now. Including. Primary. Content that is suitable. Site is so unfriendly.
NL: to show the idea the same way that HP is structured put the same way all the (word?) in one place and then we have segmentation. Segment by the customers. For disabled people. For businesses. For all categorized in one place looking for the content. On the left hand side.
SLH: a structure that has different implementation.
PG: multi language site.
SLH: good.
BM: easily accessible and get to information quickly and appealing feels right not fancy and draws the person in. Look and feel.
AC: a lot of our problems arise with graphic designers makes the front more appealing to them. I don’t know how.
AA:. Showing practice.
HBj information overload.
SLH: avoid information overland.
HB: 7 by 2 comes to mind.
AG: do a lot of collaboration the small task force edit their own work. Without having to
DS: I’d like to see more deaf and blind people work in our group.
DB: brainstorming.
NL: Chat?
JB: we have many mailing groups. Evaluating and repair group has IRC meetings on IRC using standard tools.
NL: is very useful. I would like to see the use, the latest developments in accessibility. Frequently asked questions.
CL: should be intuitively obvious that when you hit the sight when you need from the sight from the site can come into.
Steve: supports the simplification aspect. Technical expert view, and public view. I want to see the things with WAI integrate with the W3C. WAI has a good branding. I like the idea of best practices, and help the world by implementing the best practices. W3C lays the foundational recommendations for the web. WAI guidelines affects how you implement this foundation for the web. Something laying out foundational big sites. Multipurpose modes. All these things we are trying to do in a potential way. Still use the tools how the tools will be built. Log validator. Something that can be W3C is asked to be. All things to all people. The programmer who wants to. One of the big challenges is meeting with various.
CC: one of the things I would like to see as a developer, right at the front of CSS template I can plug and play this one. Plug in my content so that a good place to go.
Dom: whatever the result of this project, something kind of legal kind
various people will want to be able to know.
Documentation of the process.
SLH: everyone had a chance to say something, and Image notes, and Doyle. A visioning. Captured things we want. Ideas for things to add to the site. now, higher level things. Why do we have this site? What would make this site successful? A vision statement is total surprise. Ideas that are important. I was working with a financial they wanted to be the cutting edge of technology. It was a big surprise. We thought they were firm and stable, they had a totally different role model for accessible.
SLH: Why are we doing this site?
AA: disseminate.
NL: educate.
DB:. Convince.
Steve: lead.
AG: prove it is doable.
NL: provide. Tools.
BM: provide information.
CC: connect disparate groupings of people.
BM: inspire.
DS: Gain Attention.
NL: Promote.
HB: simplify for elders.
SLH: what words?
CL: what does come along side means
CC: advocate.
SLH: inspire. Rung true for me. Another comment being the role model leading the way and proving that is doable. Come up with word smithing later.
SLH: Now, phrases. What kind feeling should the site elicit?
JanetWow. so cool.
SLH: good, we are not supposed to have the realistic hat on right now. Blue sky.
CL: come to the definitive source.
DS: calm feeling of resolving your problems.
CC: Eureka now I can do it.
SLH: Wow.
NL: association that establishes the standards.
This should be the objective educate the people current standards.
Dom: they say something that is true. Way I want to go.
SLH: credible
BM: work made more fun. Looking for something. Interface getting there is enjoyable.
Janetreaction leaving site, I’ve got to tell somebody about this. I am going to go tell. And that this is doable.
SLH: fostering evangelism
NL: open source. They feel they can be part of the standards.
DS: for disabled people their community growing.
DB: Everything is there.
NL: I would like to have more information about the disabled community. Who are those people?
SLH: put in the content list.
JB: can I ask a clarification who is involved? Not just disability and others.
NL: yes.
SLH: what were some things that stuck from that? Reads what was said.
PG: Accessibility is a universal idea. Thanks to accessibility.
CC: I like comprehensive.
SLH: great we got some ideas on the feeling. We thought about the idea of the image we want to project. More like we want to relate to visual design. The mood we want the site to be.
AA: inviting.
BM: simple elegant. Clear.
SLH:. for examepl, colorful, plain, artsy, cutting edge, natural, which of those...
NL: cutting edge. How they can make their cutting edge accessible.
JanetI would vote for elegant. Some of the other fonts
DS: I like usable as a part of that.
AA: uncluttered.
SLH: Starting to get into something about goals and objectives. Phrases. What are the objectives? High level three primary objectives for the site.
CC: Crisp clean and no caffeine.
JB: I would say we want to understand the issue, get resource they need and they may be able to engage, as they are interested.
SLH: primary objectives.
DS: I want perfect site.
CC: through WAI I can get to and understand all information. My first introduction to W3C is through WAI. Now they are interested. Front door. Find personalization
DS: Quickly find what you need.
SLH: [find all information reads] Deliberately mixed.
PG: explain why it is good for them.
SLH: goes along with what we were saying, we might want to give them additional information, along with why they came to the site - the right understanding. Some secondary objectives.
NL: one stop shopping for accessibility needs. Come to this site. Leads.
DS: really enlarge commentary base.
Janetbuilding upon Natasha, visitors for them to understand 508 and WCAG, they can read or who they talk to.
AA: point to other nonW3C technologies. Made accessibility resources.
HBj port of non-English speaking visitors.
CC: walk away from the site
DB: get away from North American perspective.
DS: how the technology comes to the developing world. Like Cell phones.
HB: how things come up to the level where we want to be.
HBj how do you put this into multi modal access. Meets all the W3C specifications. Shining example of how this.
CC: we have on the site examples. Demonstrate.
SLH: put that on our list of specifics. Touchstone and examples.
CC: expanding beyond the coding to the web pages. Different from distributing examples.
SLH: beyond content there. Blue sky content. Vision goals and objectives.
DS: expansion of Cognitive issues served.
CC: how do I design page for whom.
SLH: jump into constraints. We got some really good ideas and thoughts and words on that. And now for some not so fun parts. Challenges and constraints on this?
Janeta challenge is general user expectation. What they expect is a good site. When want think is going to impress them. May not impress them as leading edge.
SLH: people are used to the latest and greatest. Often doesn’t take into thought the other user.
Dom one of the biggest challenges the two parts is usually user agent support.
SLH: time money resources.
CC: our anxiety about getting things done.
Steve: what is the balance? What is the majority of what people have to get there?
Janet the idea is that in an effort everything you never get it done. You have never have it ready. It was good to hear your remark a little bit of usability goes a long way.
SLH: wanting to get everything out.
Dom web site is visiting by very different people.
NL: lack of content management system.
SLH: culture at the W3C. An issue. Different working group. Culture.
CL: I think there is a problem with local international symbols can convey to people.
Companies harder to reach them publish Pierre a lot of information. The number of personal web pages.
SLH: large number of people doing their own web design.
AA: issue of non-W3C materials.
SLH: some constraint.
BM: finding the herb to herd the cats.
SLH: we’ll put the hats on them. re-iterate: time and resources.
AG: collaboratively way of getting things done.
CC: takes a long time to get things done.
SLH: wrap this up. Give everyone a chance to say how you felt about this morning and talk about the next step. Open wide comments process and where to go next. What are you walking away with this morning? XYZ is particularly important.
BM: I am encouraged. I think there is a lot of talent here. And it is big task I feel encouraged.
AG: I think it is really important to look at existing sites see what is right, and take that from there.
NL: to narrow down to come up with the results.
AA: I would like to see the raw results.
SLH: you want the raw, as well as a pared down synthesis.
JB: I was excited to hear the diversity for the site. This represents much broader possibilities for the site.
Janet this is the first EO meeting I’ve attended I had a pleasure to attend. The first page we had a review that did some of this and to hear I would like to hear your techniques at HP (Natasha).
HB: we have a winner.
JB: do you want to talk about the next step?
SLH: next step Convene this task force to talk about where the next steps are. All the information is available talk with Blossom Charmane and Andrew what role they want to play on that. Come up with an initial draft on that. One of the things on my list; a comparison analysis. To establish some bench marking coming back to the EO working group with a plan, and following up with what Steve said which it to prioritize this.
AA: are you going to invite people with other windows.
SLH: I think I will publish the raw information have our subgroup task force synthesize it. Vision comments. Judy?
Dom a mini meeting for the task force?
JB: we have not done that before not in this group before. We may need to if we aren’t doing that before.
SLH: we’ll develop some materials for the task force. Early drafts anything beyond will go to EO in terms of the internal workings of the task. This will have to go to the W3C. Action item do we have something to take up?
JB: I want to just to make a comment before we come back from lunch. Now I am thinking about the one thing we were talking about at the break. Coming back since July and kind of stalled out and gone into hibernation for a while. We don’t have definite resources guaranteed to move on this right now, probably not realistic.
JB: So when we come back from lunch. What was on the WAI gallery discussion? Yesterday we got through a preparatory discussion which of the deliverables ought to be updated. Affect half of deliverables list. Then we had visitors. Thank QA When can go back into that discussion again. I put up links a variety of lists. A list of deliverables from the EO charter. That is the most organized way that we can go through the whole long list some specific transition work. So that we can spend some time with the web content working group this afternoon scheduled from 3 to 4:30 and spend the rest on the WAI gallery. And then the last agenda item is still user materials. Do another brainstorm the suite of resources. Does that sound good for the latest update of our agenda? EO has some joint meetings on the glossary work on Friday. Make sure everybody has some comments.
Janet thanks for inviting me.
Steve thanks for inviting.
JB: lets start again right at one.
[Meeting adjourned for lunch.]
... continued from Monday 3 March
Coordinating transition of EOWG materials to WCAG 2.0 support
JB - pleased to see hat most people staying on
Agenda - 1300 to 1445, Thursday 6 March
JB - suggests scheduling Thursday morning - 0900 to 1200
Scheduled for Friday - all day
2 hour meeting scheduled on Friday - all EO members welcome
[Meeting Closed at 1740]