on this page: attendees - outreach updates - standards harmonization - forthcoming meetings - next meeting
agenda in e-mail list archives: (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2003OctDec/0108.html)
AA: Yesterday we announced a seminar (Web Access And Inclusion For People With Disabilities) with Helen Petrie in Jan 2004 about the UK DRC study. We have had 50 responses in 24 hours, very pleasing result.
JB: Last week was at a meeting of the UN -discussion about adoption of international standards for web accessibility. Also presented at a side event (Global Forum on Disability) on accessibility, and had a press conference where some speakers highlighted things they had been talking about. will send to list. Lots of good networking and outreach opportunities.
HB: attended Society for Technical Communications (STC) Meeting.
CL: chaired Web site Usability and Accessibility for Government conference in Ottawa. Noted that one participant complained that there are competing web accessibility standards.
JB: updated Standards Harmonization document from last draft, including:
JB: [walked the meeting through the Standards Harmonization document and asked for comments]
HB: opening para should form the basis of the whole document; WCAG is background for developers
JB: should we flip opening two sentences?
HB: mostly deals with WCAG 2.0; purpose of WCAG is to inform designers of Authoring Tools as to what they need to accommodate to produce accessible stuff.
JB: audience is policy makers and guideline writers - who go off and build their own
JB: trying to capture suggestions in Standards Harmonization change log
HS: we are focusing too much on the technical subject - need to say something about the social aspects
DS: concurs
JB: organisations need to be careful when developing in-house versions of guidelines as they are setting themselves up for ongoing development and maintenance
HB: overall this is true, but might be some local or national concerns where guidelines need to be adjusted because of local peculiarities, e.g., availability of tools
JB: how do we say this, but not encourage it?
HB: need to consider this and try and include the situation where it maybe necessary to localize or have specific extensions
JB: Denmark and Canadian variations are much different from Japan where they are combining WCAG1.0, WCAG 2.0 and US Section 508 bits and pieces
JB: should emphasis in overview be more on Authoring Tools? Also need to add in ATAG 1.0 mention.
HB: quite a few arguments for standards harmonization, but main purpose has to do with acquiring the tools with which people author for the web. Will experiment with how to incorporate this.
CL: agreement - also, action steps seemed more goals than steps. Authoring tools could become a step.
JB: took out mention of UAG as discussion seemed to be flawed. Don't want to lose this issue, just need to say it differently and more clearly.
HB: maybe a separate document is need showing how the guidelines relate to one another?
JB: Matt May has something on this. Judy would prefer not a separate document - what do people think?
general agreement that all guidelines need to be included somehow
HB: what about device independence?
CC: the original piece about web developers sounded good, but what was the issue re "transform your job"?
JB: trying to get WAI generally to focus on more strategic things that will cause "breakthroughs", but we do still need incremental progress
JB: what do people think about 'social acceptance' issue that Henk raised?
General agreement that some consideration of this point is required.
JB: what stuff should be in the action steps? Chuck suggested that the current list looks like grand goals.
CL: we can keep existing steps, but need to tie them timelines.
JB: action steps should start with verbs
Other Action Step suggestions captured in Standards Harmonization change log
JB: what about modifications? And Helle's points.
HS: extensions don't harm standardization, but modifications can
JB: one company delayed Authoring Tool accessibility because of release of US Section 508 and conflict with W3C guidelines.
HS: this is already generically in the document
suggestions regarding changing the guidelines are captured in Standards Harmonization change log
general agreement from meeting
SP: need to include and address reasons for fragmentation
JB: thanks for regular discussion on the list - please keep it up
January 2004