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

EOWG Minutes Tuesday 2 March 2004 Meeting

on this page: attendees - how pwd use the web - internationalization - case for accessibility - glossary - harmonization - next meeting

Meeting Summary and Action Items


EOWG Face-to-Face Meeting 1-5 March 2004 Cannes-Mandelieu, France - Agenda for Tuesday 2 March




How PWD Use the Web (Continued from Monday)

Background (from agenda):


Grocery Clerk scenario amended after discussion yesterday

JB: we seem to be highlighting a P3 item (checkpoint 14.2) three times now - is this too many?

HB: "tally" - should add into the intro paragraph something about him having difficulty keeping track of how much he is spending - just the math bit is not sufficient. Add at end of first para. [changelog]

NL: can we add something about the fact that the web helps people live fuller lives by enabling them to do things they previously couldn't

AA: maybe add something to the general intro about the web making daily living/.tasks easier [changelog]

AC: what about use of icons?

JB: not a check point for navigation

NL: "running tally" is good - what else can we say?

JB: running total?

HB: this would translate ok with local phrase

JB: what about "bagged groceries"?

many participants from various countries did not understand Mr Sands' job - this doesn't happen in many countries

AA: what about using 'supermarket' rather than 'grocery store' - agreed [changelog]

JB: also we need to explain 'bagging groceries' [changelog]

DB: in France when we translate we would adapt the situation

discussion about the use of the term 'clerk' - seems to imply paper-worker - what about 'supermarket assistant' [changelog]

JB: do we need to clean up and/or expand the search bit of the scenario?

HB: just make it 'different kinds of search options' (remove 'several') [changelog]

HS: this scenario will be the hardest to translate and have credibility - especially in eastern Europe

discussion about Down Syndrome and cognitive disability

JB: what about the motivation of the supermarket wanting to make the web site 'usable'? - may be add the term 'competitive' [changelog]

discussion about the general credibility of this scenario - is there a better scenario to bring in a person with a cognitive disability?

DB: last para - thought he had lost his job by this stage in the scenario

JB: to think about this [changelog]

PG: when we train web managers about disability - they learn the rules but don't have an understanding about disabilities

JB: maybe we have difficulty with cognitive disability being mainstreamed into society in many countries?

Mid-Morning Break

JB: introduction and disclaimers at start of section 2

HS: intro talks about terms may vary between countries - what about adding situations/circumstances may vary between countries/cultures?

DB: what about adding something about the 'inspiration' for the scenarios? based on real people, inspired by potential of technology, etc

HB: what about adding material describing the disabilities and the implications for computer/web use? In Denmark we describe, e.g., the legal definition of 'blindness' and the technology they use.

AA: WebAIM has a good section on this - see disability types links on WebAIM

JB: we have some of this material - see Different Disabilities that Can Affect Web Accessibility and Assistive Technologies and Adaptive Strategies

JB: additional items from the Changelog needs one person to methodically go through these.

JB: we also need to update all the links - at least seven broken, others are incorrect, others are not precise - volunteers?

HB: depending on Friday agenda I could do this (or at home shortly).

Richard Ishida (Chair I18N) joined the meeting

SLH: what about the possibility of adding something font enlargement to the cognitive disability scenario? young woman in madrid with cognitive disability mentioned font size as issue

JB: this would be good for Mr Sands [changelog]

SD: deaf-blind student - concentrated on vision no mention of impact of deafness. Also, need to differentiate the examples more.

discussion that subway not understood in many places

SLH: how about instead of 'subway' use 'local train'

HB: "she also uses her portable Braille device" - where is this possible?

AC: need to link to "portable Braille device" [changelog]

JB: we'll also explain captioning better [changelog]

HS: need link to clear explanation of 'Assistive Technologies' from introduction. Also, we have Table of Contents. Following that link is list of scenarios, but lead line says "The following examples highlight use of some accessibility solutions" - these solution are only included in braces after the scenario title. Can we try "The following list shows the scenarios with some accessibility solutions". [changelog - editor to consider]

JB: last call for comments today. Please print out and see if 'good' after changelog incorporated.


Quick overview of I18N Activity by Richard Ishida

Task forces - web services; core, GEO (guidelines, education and outreach)

Lunch break

Presenting the case for accessibility (continued from Monday)

Background (from agenda):


SLH: Listing specific WCAG 1.0 checkpoints. Good, because helps people know specifics? Bad, because then need to go back and WCAG 2.0 later? (for example, see Technical Factors)

NL & AA: support this approach - helps management/policy people talk to technical people

SLH: look in Social Factors pages at accessibility and try to rewrite and add checkpoints to match the Technical Factors page [changelog]

review questions from Technical Factors :

Q1 - yes

Q2 - yes

Are the pieces in the right place - that is, are the topics covered on the right sub-page? Are the references to topics covered on other pages appropriate (not repeating all, yet mentioning relevant aspects)?

SLH: do the cross references make sense? are their too many / too few?

AA & HS: volunteered to read [action]

WAI Glossary

Background (from agenda):


JB: hundreds of W3C translations currently in place (of variable quality) - WAI has a list of priority documents for translation

JB: how to bring glossary back in scope - can we select, say, 30 words that becomes a prerequisite for translations (specifically that are needed for the longer, technical documents)

Wendy Chisholm joined the meeting.

JB: stepped us through the draft policy

JB: reason for a short glossary is to have a common terminology for all languages

JB: how to choose the words to include?

JB: volunteers to look at priority list?

HS & NL & PG to consider requirements for longer, technical documents and propose short list of terms for glossary

some notes: WAI Common Glossary discussion & Wendy has more


Why Standards Harmonization is Essential to Web Accessibility

Background (from agenda):


JB: updated meeting on recent changes - "browsers" added - trying to capture essence of what is needed here. Also, rolled 'browsers', 'media players' and 'assistive technology' together.

Wendy: careful about use of word 'key' (primary vs first) as confusing with keys on keyboard

HS: need description of assistive technology role

general consensus that the essence what we wanted include is here

SLH: why user agents, when we are concentrating on content?

JB: meeting several weeks ago requested it (possibly as a separate document - but too hard, so embedded)

Browsers section - by paragraph:

Wendy: "render reliably" - explain this better (testing, work arounds, etc) [changelog]

JB: does current CSS phrasing in paragraph 1 suggest CSS should not be used?

discussion about Fragmentation problem as lead in to more general harmonization/standardization

paragraph 2 - support for "longdesc" - are there better examples / non-contentious examples?

JB: in what sense does UAAG support access to accessible content?

JB: best approach may be to discuss with Matt May as he knows UAAG very well. [action]

paragraph 3 - lag in UA adoption/take-up; also in assistive technology adoption/take-up

discussion suggested splitting section on user agents from assistive technologies [changelog]

Discussion about "action steps"

What's missing?

Also, copy edits that anyone notices, please send to Judy direct.

Next Meeting

[Thursday 4 March 2004 - Mandelieu, France - see Face to Face meeting Agenda]

DB: vote of thanks to JB & SLH for these two days

Last updated on $Date: 2004/03/11 17:51:27 $ by $Author: shawn $