agenda in e-mail list archives: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2004AprJun/0021.html
JB: Pulished a response to UK disability rights study to the finding on the relevance WCAG to requirements - posted to list. Comments or questions?
JB: Links to report from Disability Rights Commission. Has policy recommendations which are interesting for EOWG regarding context, training, improved evaluation, access to AT, etc.
RC: no one conforming to AAA, especially interesting for WCAG WG, because working on logos. AAA very difficult - same for 2.0, big problem when trying to tell people about accessibility. Give weight to each point in WCAG 2.0 - looking to Italian version also and others.
JB: are you saying we should have 2 levels?
RC: unsure - has doubts. Sense of continuity between 1st and second.
JB: doubt about retaining 3rd level.
RC: Yes
JB: WCAG WG will be taking issues from end of report and looking to make sure they are among issues to be looked at. Will add issues - they find low level of conformance as well.
HB: Daisy/ISO (Digital Talking Book Meeting at Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic in Princeton). George Kerscher asserted that EO was planning to address the accessibility aspects of Math-ML - I was surprised to see this.
HB: specifically said EOWG would work on it
JB: we'll discuss - unsure what will come of this.
Discussion of final round of changes to this document. Discussed editing issues and how to give credit to editors. Want to develop standard for all EOWG documents.
This document is now titled: Developing a Web Accessibility Business Case for Your Organization
JB: improve acknowledgements section and web-based survey questions for closing doc for now
SLH: Has responded to all commments as of last Wed. If you sent comments last week and did not receive response please let me know. Comments can be viewed at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-eo-editors/
JB: to archive comments for later discussion and public viewing
JB: Anyone planning to send and hasn't yet?
CC: Has some comments that will be sent this afternoon.
JB: Send all comments to editors list: wai-eo-editors@w3.org
JB: Traditional way of working with documents isn't great. Working on new options
JB: One thing is placement - bottom of overview page is where we're leaning. Add section of contributors. Other options were listing whomever had been or was primary hands on editor.
JB: Want to be consistent with other groups but our documents are less formal.
CC: Concerned about movement off and on of list - constant changes.
JB: Yes - currently a pointer to list but not descriptive enought
JB: Difficult to figure out what's best because of turnover
CL: Would be embarrassed to be singled out as an editor because was so long ago. Doesn't represent current document.
CL: Current one is very different (good)
SLH: Instead of being listed as a past editor - substantial contributor would be ok?
CL: Would be ok
JB: to archive comments for later discussion and public viewing
JB: Web based survey to be placed: are you comfortable with version xx/xx/xxxx of document?
AA: deadline - timeline so answered in time
CC: Comfortable with document being up in current form
JB: because not a recommendation track document we have more flexibility. Can post as now and then fix small things noticed later. Will add a comments section to doc - for final review.
RC: read old document believes it is a very good document. Easy to read. Would like to see translations in Italian and other languages.
SLH: A few people said seemed ready to go. Would expect it will be easy for most people to skim through and say ready to go.
JB: Should add document to priority list for translating document.
JB: comments on level of contribution to be added to document.
SLH: Draft reveiwed by EOWG members, and 2nd list, these people substantially contributed to this document. Question is what level of contribution to be "substantial"?
JB: Want these standards to be applicable to other documents
AA: Hard to do - people who've appeared as editors on document obviously. People who've contributed through list or verbally during calls.
AA: Should try to set process for future, but would be hard to do on documents in the past because of length of process.
JB: Are you saying we shouldn't list contributors?
AA: Rule should evolve
JB: Editors discretion on list.
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/EO-Deliverables.html
review for quarterly updating of done, priorities, wishlist etc
Discussed changing order of Deliverables for a number of items.
JB: Has been updated today and need to discuss for future deliverables
JB: All 1Q has notes to be moved to other sections
JB: Change Complete 9 and 10 February 2004, Madrid, Spainbest practices training workshop to top of Q1
AA: People could work on General Links on Web Accessibility in next few weeks/months. Maybe a task force
JB: Yes - hard to tell what to put on and what not
AA: Afraid will be pushed off again for another quarter
AA: Would like to see it worked on
JB: Change to Q2 "middle"
HS: Glossary - sent to list today some work on this
JB: Move to Q2 middle?
JB: reach agreement on small subset of terms, compile small compact glossary, and then review. Brainstorm part almost done
HS: Sylvie and Pierre also contributed
JB: any objections to calling brainstorming done then?
JB: Please comment on list to HS's post
JB: Curriculum for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines - Chuck L working on.
SLH: Two new items - can't change pages such as WCAG, etc. (TR documents). People intimidated by all information at top of thse documents. Would like to make a "plain" language page to introduce document
SLH: cover page to slide set as well
SLH: Opportunity we're missing with WAI Quick Tips. Even this page is daunting. We have the information in the Quick Tips
JB: Explain different between that and getting started page.
SLH: Intro to Accessibilty would include a tranformation of Getting Started
JB: Let's go back to top of Q1. Moved a bunch of docs nearly done. Adding a few new items - comments or discussion.
CC: Will have room for Quick tips in Q2?
JB: Could move to Q3?
SLH: Need to have with redesign - depends on how that progress goes.
CC: move the Evaluation Resource Suite?
JB: Got a lot of need for that document now
JB: Propose moving Brainstorm on clean-up and consolidation of Before/After Site Reconstruction Demos to Q3
JB: Will make edits proposed and then we can look at again.
SLH: Complete update of Getting Started: Making a Web Site Accessible - part of redesign. Move up to Q2 and be part of other intros.
HB: Move Complete revision and update of Curriculum for Web Content Accessibility Guidelinesbased on WCAG 2.0
JB: will move to Q1 2005
CC: 1-4 on Q4 could be moved forward?
JB: We hope it will be stabalized by Q4 to make Quick Tips
JB: Myths about Accessibilty - may be completed earlier
HB: Wish list add - Math ML
SLH: Current WG has knowledge to contribute to this?
HB: Accessiblity tool-makers working on it
AA: As topics evolve and membership changes
JB: Other comments welcomed about deliverables document
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/charter4.html
FYI on some charter and process updates underway
JB: Questions, comments on the Charter?
JB: Participation section does have some changes - all ok with this?
JB: Added: Remain aware of related work in other WAI Working Groups
CC: Monstrous job
JB: Harvey does a lot of that now. Maybe not a blanket requirement for all members
CS: Move into group requirement instead of member?
JB: Help track instead?
CC: Essential component of EOWG - hard to do as individuals
JB: Scope section - add to that tracking or remaining aware of
JB: Keep "help with" in member section
JB: Move Implementation Planning Resource Suite http://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/ to Q2 to be finished
Friday 23 April 2004