EOWG Meetings 2014

From Education & Outreach

Main EOWG Meetings page

Main EOWG Meetings page

Past Meetings

(No teleconference on 26 December)

19 December Teleconference

Agenda

  1. Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility - Discuss issues from weekly survey
    Points for discussion:
    1. How to better clarify why UAAG would be required
    2. Should there be a separate page with a complete example policy
    3. Level A conformance claim for ATAG
    4. Policies printed or only online (links to standards or list URIs)?
    5. Should there be a separate topic to discuss third-parties
    6. Issues with recommending version numbers or not
  2. Happy Holidays! (No teleconference on 16 December or 2 January)

Summary

@@

Minutes: @@

Participants

  • Present: @@
  • Regrets: @@ (No survey response from @@)
(people who missed the meeting) Read summary & skimmed minutes
  • [done] name, 00 Month 2015

12 December Teleconference

Agenda

  1. Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility - Discuss open issues from weekly survey
  2. Dynamic Guide for Project Managers
  3. Reminder: Eval Tools List - review recent changes and make sure you're OK with publishing this as done

Summary

The meeting began by welcoming new participants to the group. Brent Bakken of Pearson and Reinaldo Ferraz of the Brazilian Network Information Center introduced themselves and were welcomed by all. Shawn began the meeting with a reminder to all to stay current on notifications for your availability to attend teleconferences. Next there was discussion of the comments collected on the progress of the Organizational Policies document. Two major considerations regarding the document were how to address third party content and how to define the scope. With the understanding that the guidance in the document must align with WCAG, a consensus began to emerge to reduce the emphasis on 3rd party content demonstrated in the 2002 version, while maintaining references to it in policy recommendations and being clear that if a 3rd party tool is required in order to complete a task, it must be included in policy statements. In considering the two currently offered options for scope definition, the first would focus on web content owned by the organization with an emphasis on WCAG and only passing mentions of ATAG and UAAG while the second would be broader and include greater consideration of ATAG and UAAG as policy is expanded to include internal tools and browsers. Consensus is emerging for support of the first option, although there is recognition of the need to reference the bigger picture in some way. Consideration was next given to progress on the Dynamic Guide which is in a much earlier stage of development. The group reviewed the analysis of the goals and considered the Dynamic Planning Tool prototype. Suggestions were made for additional task considerations,such as risk analysis and QA, and general approval was given for the direction of the project development. The group expressed their strong approval of the surveys as a time and task management tool and asked to include the weekly work as a survey. Shawn thanked everyone and asked them to try to complete surveys early - including approval of the publication of the Evaluation Tools list - to allow time for participants to review each others comments.

12 December Meeting Minutes

Participants

  • Present: AnnaBelle, Brent, EricE, Jan, Jonathan, Kevin, Lydia, PaulSchantz, Reinaldo, Shadi, Shawn, Wayne
  • Regrets: Helle, Vicki, Sylvie, Andrew, Sharron (No survey response from Liam, Bim, Denis, Howard)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Sharron, 18 Dec 2014
  • [done] name, 00 Dec 2014

5 December Teleconference

Agenda

  1. Eval Tools List
    • Briefly discuss any open issues
    • Confirm all issues from Nov survey addressed, and it's ready to publish and announce from EOWG's perspective
  2. Dynamic guide for planning - To help us think big picture from users' perspectives, let's look at the Personas, focusing specifically on the Tasks under each persona.
  3. Weekly surveys

Summary

EO met and considered changes made to the Evaluation Tools List. The group appreciate dthe addition of accessiiblity information as a request for inut from vendors and asked that the provision of that info be filtered for and added as one of the revealed Details when opened. Also agreed that moderators can approve and inform EO of new search criteria added without the need for group review. Kevin walked participants thorugh the tasks he has developed in realtion to his personas for the Dynamic Planning Guide. He asked everyone to continue to think of tasks and discussed feedback reveiwed thus far. Finally Shawn announced the intent of the groups to use the survey and a way to focus and management participant input. With thanks, the meeting adjourned.

05 December Meeting Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Sharron, Kevin, EricE, AnnaBelle, Wayne, Lydia, Sylvie, Andrew, Shadi
  • Regrets: Helle, Jonathan, Reinaldo (No survey response from Liam, Bim, Denis, Howard)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, 00 Dec 2014

(No teleconference on 28 November)

21 November Teleconference

Agenda

  1. Eval Tools List - discuss open comments and resolutions
  2. Dynamic guide for planning - Review initial ideas; discuss overall goals, approach, scope, constraints; brainstorm other ideas...
  3. Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility - Discuss any open issues in Github issues list (or wiki page or EOWG e-mail)
  4. Upcoming work and teleconferences
  5. Availability for possible EOWG face-to-face meetings in 2015 survey - please fill in the survey with your best guess for now; change it when you know more

Participants

  • Present: @@
  • Regrets: Shadi, Vicki, Lydia, Jan, Anna Belle, Reinaldo, Helle, Sylvie (No survey response from Liam, Bim, Denis, Howard)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, 00 Nov 2014

14 November Teleconference

Agenda

  1. Eval Tools List - discuss open comments
  2. Developing Organizational Policies on Web Accessibility - Discuss any open issues in Github issues list (or wiki page or EOWG e-mail)

Summary

This meeting was focused primarily on the comments and suggestions for improvement of the Evaluation Tools List before final publication. First was a discussion of how to represent tool accessibility - through conformance claims based on WCAG, UAAG, and ATAG; by allowing a check box indicating the tool is accessible; linking to expernal information about usability by AT; etc. The final recommendation was to provide an Optional field for vendors to provide either a comment on the tools accessibility or a link to tool accessibility information. Additionally a filter will discover those who have opted in to that.

Next was a consideration of the amount of filter categories and the unuseful information that is provided by allowing people to add their additional filters using the "Other" category. The WAI-ACT team will review comments and bring back a new approach. Next was a discussion of the introductory paragraph. The group considered whether the "submit your tool" option belongs at the top of the page as well as the wording of the linked "web content" sentence. It was agreed to drop the link, keep the wording, and reconsider the placement of the button. The group was asked to be alert to any posted revisions and check on the wiki for this week's work.

Minutes, 14 November 2014

Participants

  • Present: Andrew, AnnaBelle, Eric, Helle, Jan, Kevin, Lydia, Paul, Shadi, Sharron, Shawn, Sylvie
  • Regrets: Jon, Vicki, Wayne (No survey response from Liam, Bim, Denis, Howard)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, 00 Nov 2014

7 November Teleconference

Agenda

Summary

The meeting began with a consideration of the comments submitted about the relationship between the new "Media Accessibility User Requirements" and the existing "How People with Disabilities Use the Web." Discussion led to a revision of EO suggestions for how to frame the relationship between the two documents. Current Comments from EO on Media User Requirements are summarized on the wiki. Next the group considered comments submitted on the survey for publication of the Evaluation Tools List. The goal was to do a preliminary review of the comments and save final dispensation for a time when Shadi and Eric could join. Group discussion led to a recommendation to change "web site" in the intro to "web content" and link to the WAI definition of that term. Additional suggestions were made about a process to curate the addition of filter criteria and the fact that the "Assistance" and "Authoring Tool" as section titles of filter categories are misnomers - they do not accurately describe what is in each section. Next was a quick overview of where EOWG is currently focused and a discussion of the emerging timeline and schedule for getting work reviewed and published. EO participants were asked to expect more surveys and to be alert to the timelines attached to those. A question arose about the relelvance of ATAG to the Eval Tools list and the suggestion was to add the comment to the current survey and to the ATAG-WG if it is deemed relevant to their current work.

Participants

  • Present: Kevin, Shawn, AnnaBelle, Sharron, Paul, Wayne, Jan
  • Regrets: Andrew, Helle, Eric, Jon, Vicki, Shadi (No survey response from Liam, Bim, Denis, Howard)

Minutes, 07 November, 2014

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Andrew, 14 Nov 2014
  • [done] Sylvie, 2014-November-13
  • [done] Eric, 2014-November-12

31 October 2014 teleconference agenda

Agenda

Summary

Today's was a short meeting to review the F2F meeting, give a brief summary of what was discussed as a work plan for the coming months, and provide highlights from TPAC and the 20th Anniversary Symposium. Members are encouraged at this time to submit any ideas for improving group interaction and effectiveness and to suggest new participants in EO. Watch for announcement of surveys to capture current participant understanding, level of participation, and general involvement.

Participants

  • Present: AnnaBelle, Jan, Paul, Sharron
  • Regrets: Shadi, Eric, Kevin, Andrew, Shawn, Helle, Jonathan, Vicki, Wayne, Sylvie
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim, Denis, Howard)

Minutes, 31 October, 2014

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Sylvie, 13 November 2014
  • [done] Shawn, 31 October 2014
  • [done] Kevin, 5 November 2014
  • [done] Eric, 12 November 2014
  • [done] Andrew, 14 November 2014

27-28 October 2014 face-to-face

Topics and Material, Agenda, Minutes

24 October 2014

Agenda

Summary

First the group considered the feedback provided to Eric on the current version of the tutorials. He changed the opening of the forms tutorial as suggested and then considered how to provide support for developers to be assured that they had properly implemented some of the complex items like forms and menus. After considering what kind of testing guidance to provide, it was determined to put a link to Easy Checks and have further testing guidance put on a wish list for the next iteration fo the Tutorials. In considering WCAG-WG comments on the Navigation tutorial, Shawn requested that Eric craft a reply to WCAG summarizing his response and resulting changes. EO will review before sending to determine if the current changes meet the guidance offered in their comments. Next was consideration of the Evaluation Tools List. The group felt that the disclaimer is not sufficiently strong or prominent on the Overview page. After discussion, Shawn and Eric agreed to go offline, craft a proposed solution and bring it back to the group. The drafts of the planning docs were approved and the result is that many new things have been posted. Participants were alerted to the fact that following the F2F next week, we will publish a schedule for refining and polishing those. Next was the consideration of the agenda for the F2F, starting with the joint meeting with WCAG-WG. The goal is to leave that meeting with a plan for working together on the QuickRef and to foster understanding of our intent to help support the clarity and efficacy of outreach for WCAG technical support docs, including this one. Another item on the F2F agenda is the consideration of what we have called "QuickStart Guides" meant to be analogous to the EasyChecks for people in other roles within development teams. AnnaBelle, Kevin, and Jon met and will send notes from their meeting about how to add graphical elements to these support documents in consideration of people's varied learning styles. General feeling was to focus on tasks rather than job roles in providing the materials.Shawn asked everyone to review the agenda. Especially welcome are framing comments or input from those who will NOT be in attendance. Thanks all and see you next week!

Participants

  • Present: Sharron, AnnaBelle, Shawn, EricE, sylvie, Wayne, Kevin, Paul, Jon
  • Regrets: Jan, Shadi, Andrew, Vicki, Wayne, Helle
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim, Denis, Howard)

Minutes, 24 October, 2014

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Andrew, 14 Nov 2014

17 October

Agenda

  1. Planning documents survey - discuss open issues as needed
    • Discuss "Though I would have preferred at least some of the example policies to invite public feedback on any issues encountered." from Andrew
  2. Tutorials survey - discuss open issues as needed
  3. Tools survey - discuss open issues as needed
  4. Reminder: Important! EOWG - Draft posting review needed from active EOWG participants - when can you complete it? (Tuesday preferable)
  5. EOWG f2f 27-28 October - teleconference availability
  6. Planning and managing accessibility documents - additional comments

Summary

Shawn emphasized the importance of getting EO review before TPAC - in fact all are asked to complete a planning documents survey, a Tutorials survey, and a Tools survey by Tuesday Oct 21 if at all possible. Posted to the EO mailing list are instructions for completing the surveys. The meeting then focused on review of comments submitted for the planning suite of documents. Discussion included consideration of the word "Strategic" in title of the central planning doc; reworking of the intro; the need to understand that the Policies document is meant to frame a consideration of internal policy, not external statements; and how to convey the nonlinear nature of the planning process. The following resolutions were made as a result of the discussions:

  • The title will remain "Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Guidance for Developing a Plan for Your Organization or Project" with an open mind for changing it if there is strong negative reaction.
  • Kevin to consider changes to the intro as discussed.
  • Clarity of the fact that the current Policy document is focused on internal policy and a reference to public facing statements within the Next Steps section.
  • Will remove the analogy to security but emphasize integral nature of accessibility planning in other ways.

We ended with a reminder that the Face to Face is scheduled for 27 and 28 October. EO participants are asked to document their availability for attending teleconferences on that day - and for all other scheduled teleconferences as well. Thanks to all.

Participants

  • Present: Sharron, Shawn, AnnaBelle, Kevin, Eric, Shadi, Paul, Wayne, Andrew
  • Regrets: Vicki, Jan, Sylvie, Jonathan
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim, Denis, Helle)

Minutes, 17 October, 2014

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Name, Date
  • [done] Sylvie, 13 November 2014

10 October

Agenda

Summary

Kevin has made significant revisions to the Implementation suite of documents. EO reviewed the comments that Sharron submitted on the wiki. The purpose of her comments was to make more clear the distinction between the Impleemnting document and the Improving document. Kevin will consider the edits submitted by Sharron, taking group discussion into account. The issue of making the distinction more clear led to a discussion of the similarities of the document titles. Discussion led to a decision to change the Implementation title to something like "Strategic Planning for Web Accessibility: Guidance for Developing a Plan for Your Organization or Project." The group agreed on the direction and will sleep on it, submitting additional suggestions by email to the EO list. Next was a discussion of the policy document and Wayne's comments to the list. Among suggestions were to make the ATAG reference more integral, to link to the discussion of standrds versions in the Harmonization document, a need to make it clear that WAI is not recommedning for orgs to develop both long and short policy stements, and an appreciation of the templates. Finally Shawn asked EO participants to be alert to an announcement about approval of the DRAFT versions of several documents, tools, and tutorials before TPAC. That will be coming right up and there is alot to review. Please be alert and look for any errors that would prevent even draft postings of the materials.

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, AnnaBelle, Sharron, Shadi, Kevin, Jon, Wayne
  • Regrets: Vicki, Jan, Howard, Helle, Andrew
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim, Denis, Paul)

Minutes, 10 October, 2014

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Andrew, 2014.10.17
  • [done] Name, Date

03 October 2014 teleconference

Agenda

Summary

The intent of the meeting was to consider comments submitted by EO participants after they reviewed recent updates to Improving the Accessibility of Your Website, Developing Organizational Policies, and Implementing Web Accessibility Across Organizations and Projects. Since no comments had been submitted, the meeting was suspended for an hour while EO participants could review and consider them. When the meeting reconvened, discussion revealed consensus that the differences and intended use of the documents were not clear. After brainstorming new approaches and titles, Shawn asked the group to give more consideration over the next few days and to put comments on the wiki so that Kevin can consider and respond to them.

Participants

  • Present: Wayne, Shawn, Shadi, Kevin, EricE, Sharron, Paul, Jonathan
  • Regrets: Sylvie, Andrew, Howard, Helle, Jan, AnnaBelle, Vicki
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim, Denis)

Minutes, 03 October, 2014

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Name, Date

26 September 2014 teleconference

Agenda

26 September 2014 minutes cleaned up

Participants

  • Present: AnnaBelle, Jan, Shadi, EricE, Jon, kevin, Andrew, Wilco
  • Regrets: Vicki, Helle, Sylvie,
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim, Wayne, Denis, Paul, Jonathan, Jan)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Shawn 1-Oct-2014 (I'm good with the resolution.)
  • [done] Sharron 10-Oct-2014 +1 for resolution

19 September 2014 teleconference

Agenda

19 September 2014 minutes cleaned up

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Shadi, AnnaBelle, Andrew, Wayne, Jon, Eric, Kevin
  • Regrets: Denis, Vicki, Sylvie, Sharron, Helle
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Sharron, 10-Oct, 2014
  • [done] name, date

12 September 2014 teleconference

Agenda

12 September 2014 minutes draft

Participants

  • Present: Shadi, Eric, Shawn, Kevin, AnnaBelle, Wayne, Jan, Sharron, Paul, Wilco, Jon
  • Regrets: Denis, Vicki, ?Sylvie, Helle, Andrew
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, date

5 September 2014 teleconference

Agenda:

  • WCAG-EM Report Tool - discuss any remaining or new comments (please see review instructions above). Comments to discuss include:
    • Usage of Steps 2 and 3
    • Success Criteria displayed
    • Functionality of "New Report"
    • Setting focus for "Add Web Page"
    • Display placeholder text only once
    • Alternative name for "Start" page
    • Name for links under "Key Resources"
    • Separating introduction using bullets
  • Implementation Plan - discuss any remaining or new comments (please see review instructions above). Comments to discuss include:
    • Overall framing of the document
    • Clarity of the introduction
    • Skimability of the document
    • Informativeness of the content
    • Flexible use of the document
    • Editorial tone and approach
    • Any missing content or advice

05 September 2014 minutes draft

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, AnnaBelle, Sylvie, Eric, Jon, Bim, Kevin, Paul, Shadi, Wayne, Sharron, Wilco, Jon
  • Regrets: ?Eric, Denis, Howard, Vicki, Helle
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, date

29 August 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  • Implementation Plan - discuss any remaining or new comments (please see review instructions above). Some unresolved comments include:
    • Structure and organization of the content under "Key Actions" and "More Details". See email from Shawn
    • placement of examples in a sidebar
    • Calling out "PDF" (and now also "video") in section "Review Tools"
    • Tone and usefulness of starting line "Incorporating accessibility into your project or organization is as straight forward as any other planning task"
  • WCAG-EM Report Tool - discuss any remaining or new comments (please see review instructions above). Some unresolved comments include:
    • need for a "help" section?
    • heading "about this tool"
    • increase font size?
    • Placement of forwards/back buttons
    • planning beta publication approval

29 August 2014 minutes draft

Participants

  • Present: AnnaBelle, Shawn, Howard, Kevin, Eric, Shadi, Bim, Andrew, Sharron, Paul, Jon, Wayne, Jon, Wilco
  • Regrets: Wayne, Denis, Vicki, Sylvie, Andrew, Helle
    (no survey answers from Liam, Bim)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, date

22 August Teleconference

Agenda

Summary

Kevin led the group discussion to review the comments submitted about the progress of Implementing Web Accessibility. First was a suggestion, widely supported, to tighten up the wording on the Key Actions. Next were considerations of section heading titles and the title/subtitle of the document itself. The section heading "Discussion" was considered dubious in terms of translation. After a brainstorm, "More detail" was chosen as a temporary stand in to see how it sits in context. The document title and subtitle were reviewed next. Long discussion made the points that this is not really a "How To" document but it is more than a "consideration" so we decided to try dropping the subtitle and expanding the title to "Implementing Web Accessibility Across Organizations and Projects." We agreed to sleep on it and revisit in the near future. Next there was consideration of other wiki comments, including the suggestion to point to WAI-IG and WAI-Engage as Related resources for "Sharing..." section. The suggestion was rejected as WAI-Engage is not yet sufficiently robust to provide good support. Next steps are for EO participants to continue to monitor. Updates will be posted by Tuesday and Kevin will point to sections where he wants specific considerations and comments.

Wilco joined the call to discuss progress on the WCAG-EM Report tool. The example we looked at was one with dummy data and new functionality. The text updates suggested last week were added and Wilco demonstrated the new functions including a "macro-add" feature that people liked but that caused a bit of confusion. Suggestions were made for function clarity and definition, the need for Tool Tips on all buttons, excessive use of color indication, the expectation of expand/collapse behavior based on previous widgets, etc. A new prototype based on this input will be available on Tuesday for review. Wilco asked those who suggested that the macro-add function should be grouped individually on the page provide more input. He asked that they bring him suggestions about how they would want that to look. By next week, expect to wrap up functionality and move to UI and fine tuning wording and usability. Shawn extended kudos for the excellent work and reminded EO to watch Upcoming Meetings section of the wiki to keep up with current work. Thanks all!

22 August Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Shadi, Shawn, Kevin, Wayne, Sharron, Howard, Paul, Andrew, AnnaBelle, Jan, Wilco
  • Regrets: Eric, Denis, Vicki, Helle, Jon

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, date

15 August Teleconference

Agenda

  1. WCAG-EM Report Tool
    • Discuss any issues with text, including intro text, text in the information fly-outs (i), and labels.
    • Discuss the need for additional "Help" or not.
    • (put comments in Tool Comments wiki page or or GitHub Issues List or e-mail)
  2. Accessibility Support Database (ASD)
  3. Current reviews:
  4. fyi: Upcoming reviews:

Summary

The majority of today's meeting was spent in consideration of the progress on the WCAG-EM Report Tool, specifically on the text content. Shadi asked that the group consider all text content, including how buttons are labeled, the content of the info boxes, and the introductory sentences. EO participants appreciated the succinct nature of the content and had additional suggestions for brevity and clarity. One suggestion that had support was to introduce each paragraph on the first page with a bold short phrase to denote a kind of inline sub-heading. Three things were called out for emphasis - the fact that the tool does not do automated evaluation, the fact that you can continue to test without internet connectivity, and the fact that you can save and print at any point. It was noted that many phrases are transferred directly from within the text of the WCAG-EM Note. A more active voicing was suggested and less formal tone in some cases. Discussion of the title included observation that we refer to it as WCAG-EM Report Tool - why not use that name explicitly? A discussion of the Next button placement (placed right or centered) included these points:

  • Activity on page is quite left focused, easy to miss the Next all the way to the right
  • magnification of activities will not include Next button at all
  • Moving to center could be beneficial to all and not break for anyone
  • There is also a clickable progress bar at the top of the page
  • Should decide based on best practice not personal preference

Sharron agreed to research and report on Best Practice for this. Praise was given for the icon interaction and animation. The second page was considered to have too much introductory text and the suggestion was made to boil down to one clear sentence and eliminate the rest. General agreement for this page and to use this technique on all following pages. Contrast questions for text and icons were raised. A suggestion was made to link to additional WAI resources when it made sense to so and Shadi asked the group to brainstorm in the wiki for link text. as possible these changes will be implemented by mid-week and Shadi asked to keep comments coming in the wiki.

Next the group got a first peek at the Accessibility Support Database and was asked for first reaction. Most said it was confusing and needed some explanation of what it is, what it's for. Finally we took a look at current and upcoming reviews of documents in development. In the next 6 weeks we will have substantial materials to review and comment on. Please try to get in the practice of setting aside time early and mid week so that comments are registered and we use conference time to discuss and resolve any issues that arise. Thanks all.

15 August Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Shadi, Shawn, Sharron, Jonathan, AnnaBelle, Andrew, Jan, Helle
  • Regrets: Vicki, Eric, Kevin, Wilco, Denis, Howard, Paul

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • Done: Kevin, 18 Aug 2014
  • [done] name, date

8 August 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. Tutorials - Discuss any open issues from reviews
  2. Planning for Web Accessibility drafted sections: "Introduction", "Establish Roles and Responsibilities", "Develop and Implement Organizational Policy", "Review Available Tools and Resources", and "Assess Skills and Training".
    • Discuss approach and direction.
    • Are all the points (concepts, thoughts, considerations, etc.) in the document?
    • Thoughts to reduce the text or otherwise make it more skimmable, readable, understandable, digestible, enjoyable?
    • (it's not ready for word-smithing yet, though comments on the content and editorial tone of these sections is welcome)
  3. WCAG-EM Report Tool - Discuss:

Summary

In the discussion of open issues in the tutorials, the only thing unresolved was the use of the HTML5 logo and the smaller grey iconic images of miscellaneous advanced technologies. After discussion, it was agreed to leave the images as is, improve the alt text and edit the sentence referring to "not about technologies." In the next consideration of Planning for Web Accessibility, there were expressions of concern about the "wall of text," the use of "should," the need for "Introduction" and a wish for graphic illustration of the iterative nature of the process. AnnaBelle, Jonathan, and Kevin will meet as a subgroup to draft ideas for illustrations. Other comments will be taken into consideration. Finally, the group reviewed Wilco's progress on the WCAG-EM tool. Recent changes are meant to maximize the usability for newbies and support a basic approach (making it easy and clear) while allowing the greater complexity and flexibility for advanced users. There was detailed discussion of likely process flow and Wilco will review and consider suggestions and refinements are made. EO is asked to continue to monitor the development of both of these projects and comment during the week on the wiki, on GitHub or to the WAI-editors list.

8 August Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Sharron, Kevin, AnnaBelle, EricE, Jan, Howard, Paul, Jonathan, Wilco
  • Regrets: Vicki, Wayne, Andrew, Shadi, Helle
    (no survey answers from Liam, Sylvie)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • Done Helle Bjarnoe, 14 August
  • [done] name, date

1 August 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. WCAG-EM Report Tool - Discuss:
    • Overall design and structure of the application.
    • The overall order and sequence of the steps. Is it clear where you are and what you can do at each step?
    • What should and should not collapse?
    • Are there any questions left unclear about the interface as you go through it?
    • (Let's not discuss bugs or feature requests — they can be put in the GitHub Issues List (preference) or the wiki page or e-mail.)
  2. Planning for Web Accessibility - Discuss approach and direction of "Introduction", "Establish Roles and Responsibilities", and "Develop an Organizational Policy" sections. (not word-smithing yet, though comments on the content and editorial tone of these sections is welcome) see 31 July e-mail
  3. Tutorials

Summary

Shadi brought to the group the work that he and Wilco have done on the WCAG-EM Reporting Tool. The first reaction was quite positive, everyone appreciating the complexity of what they are doing. Shadi asked for feedback on the general approach as we walked through the draft steps of the tool in development. Questions included:

  • How is data saved?
  • Who else can see the data?(privacy concerns)
  • How are the pages selected for evaluation?
  • How is the date determined if performed over multiple days?
  • What is the purpose of the dummy data?
  • How else will instruction/guidance be provided?

Suggestions included:

  • Clear indication that starting new will clear data
  • Verification of the intent to clear data
  • An option to clear all dummy data
  • Indication of where you are in process
  • Several show/hide options

Shawn encouraged EO to both review the tool by looking at it, AND try actually using it to evaluate for flow. Next, Shawn renewed her request that people complete their review and acceptance of the completed Tutorials and cover page - weeks overdue. Paul and Andrew committed to completing it over the weekend. Finally we looked at progress on Kevin's work on the Planning and Implementing documents. All agreed that it is much improved for clarity. Keeping in mind that the purpose is to distill existing documents and lay a foundation for creating a more interactive system of guidance through the implementation process, EO affirmed that Kevin is on the right track. Suggestion was made to improve the term "Discussion" to something more specific, otherwise people will continue to review and comment on GitHub, the wiki, and through email.

1 August Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Helle, Shawn, Sharron, kevin, AnnaBelle, EricE, Shadi, Jon, Howard, Andrew, PaulSchantz, Wilco
  • Regrets: Vicki, Wayne, Jan
    (no survey answers from Liam, Sylvie, Howard)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, date

25 July 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility - review draft update
  2. Evaluation tools
  3. WAI WG docs for review - who will do?
  4. Tutorials - Schedule final review version of the tutorials

Summary

Kevin led the meeting off with a call for comment on his updates to the Planning and Managing Accessibility (P&M) project. EO participants are asked to review the overall structural approach on GitHub and to comment there or on the [][Feedback: Implementation Plan for Web Accessibility|P&M pages of the EO wiki]]. Of most interest at this time are questions of structure and consistency of topic organization. Discussion ensued about the place of policy development in the sequence, the importance of organizational size in plan implementation, the emphasis on roles vs responsibilities and other questions. Shadi asked that everyone reserve time mid-week to take another look at how comments were processed and applied. The group then looked at the latest prototype of the Evaluation Tools database on GitHub. Shawn asked for a look especially at the filtering mechanism, has it been sufficiently clarified, how is it working? Annabelle had not seen it previously and when approaching the search with "beginner's mind" she felt overwhelmed, looked for qualitative information, and wished that there was a capability of filtering by platform/device. Shawn asked everyone to look at this during the week and send additional comments before the meeting. Next Shawn asked for volunteers to review the Developers' Guide to Features of Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools Draft and the updated techniques documents. Sharron, Wayne and Bim will review and invite Denis as well. They will send comments as individuals unless they encounter items for EO consideration. Finally, the WAI tutorials Cover Page, Images and Tables sections are ready for final review. Sharron to email group for final sign-off on publication.

Meeting Minutes 25 July 2014

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Bim, Jan, EricE, AnnaBelle, Sharron, Kevin, Jon, Shadi, Helle, Wayne
  • Regrets: Vicki, Andrew (No survey results from Liam, Denis, Sylvie, Paul)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] name, date

18 July 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. Tutorials
  2. Evaluation tools - review early rough Prototype of new database UI
    (Comments in Evaluation tools comments wiki page)
  3. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility feedback on new approach for Establish Responsibilities section
    (Comments can be added to that wiki page or sent in e-mail)

Summary

The meeting began with a consideration of how to reword EO's response to WCAG-WGs suggestion for the Images tutorial. WCAG-WG suggested that the reference to Image maps on mobile be omitted as not relevant to WCAG 2.0. EO felt that issue did, in fact, have accessibility impact and suggested rewording of the Note in Example 1 of Image Map page to reflect that. Next the group considered the reorganization of the Image Decision tree that was prompted by Howard's observations of the cognitive difficulty in understanding the original. The group agreed that clarity was greatly improved, made a few additional refinements and accepted the new design. The group then explored the UI for the Evaluation Tools Database on GitHub and provided first impressions and feedback. Next was consideration of the organizational structure for the planned update of the resources in support of Planning for Accessibility. Discussion included consideration of pagination, text heavy presentation, whether (and how) to use expand/collapse features and other organizational questions. Content was not discussed at this time. Shadi asked all to review and comment on the structure and the *amount* of content to the Implementation Feedback page of the EO wiki. Finally, Shawn reminded everyone that there is a great deal of review work coming up and asked that everyone stay alert to email and wiki notifications of documents that need consideration. Thanks to all.

Meeting Minutes 18 July 2014

Participants

  • Present: Kevin, Shawn, Bim, EricE, Sharron, Shadi, Jan, Wayne, Howard, Jon
  • Regrets: Helle, Vicki, Andrew (No survey results from AnnaBelle, Liam, Denis, Sylvie, Paul)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • Done: Anna Belle, 7 Aug. 2014
  • Done: Helle, 7 Aug. 2014
  • [done] name, date

11 July 2014

No teleconference. Instead, please work on:

  1. Tutorials
  2. Evaluation tools - review early rough Prototype of new database UI and put comments in Evaluation tools comments wiki page

4 July 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. Tutorials
  2. Evaluation tools - review early rough Prototype of new database UI
  3. Accessibility Support Database - draft available for preview. If you want EOWG to discuss anything, let Sharron & Shawn know.
  4. Reminder: EOWG f2f Monday & Tuesday 27-28 October 2014 in California, with W3C TPAC - registration open
  5. Work for next week:

Meeting canceled due to lack of participants.

Participants

  • Present: Shadi, Kevin, Eric, Bim, Andrew, (Wayne)
  • Did not fill out survey: Anthony, Liam, Wayne
  • "Can" no shows: Denis, Sylvie, Sharron, Jan
  • "Maybe" and "not sure" no shows: Anna Belle, Howard
  • Regrets: Paul, Vicki, Helle, Shawn, Jonathan

27 June 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. WCAG Techniques for Specific Technologies - approve Location proposal
  2. WCAG-EM - (if needed) discuss any issues (WCAG-EM review e-mail)
  3. Tutorials
    • Discuss any additional comments on new material listed in 20 June agenda
    • Discuss revised cover page
      • Are we happy with what we convey on the cover page?
      • Is the tone right?
      • Should we mention both, HTML4 and HTML5?
      • Do we need the Accessibility Principles link on the top? (Concern is that it might be distracting for readers.)
      • Should we have Tips & FAQ even when no FAQ is present? (like in the tables tutorial)
      • Should we have FAQ at all? (Concern is that is may sound artificial, but may have a lot of benefits like being easy to scan…)
    • (if ready) Approve replies to WCAG comments (to be updated)
  4. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility - Discuss outline for overall information organization:
  5. Reminder: EOWG f2f Monday & Tuesday 27-28 October 2014 in California, with W3C TPAC - registration open

Summary

Shawn opened the meeting with a report of a series of meetings she and Michael Cooper held to determine placement of the agreed wording of the caution statement to be used for Accessibility Techniques for specific technologies. The group agreed with both the final wording and the placement. Wayne next reported on his review of the WCAG-EM document and gave kudos all around. He and Bim agreed that the resource was greatly improved in terms of clarity, organizational structure and general readability. Next the group considered the progress made on the WAI Web Tutorials. Finally, Kevin walked us through the plan for creating the new suite of documents for Planning and Implementing Web Accessibility. He shared the outline for the Implementation Plan and described the steps needed for completion, asking the group to weigh in on what they ultimately want the resources to look like. Once that is finalized, Kevin will develop milestones and timelines to get us there. After a brief overview, Kevin asked others to make comments on the Planning and Implementation feedback pages of the EO wiki. Shawn asked everyone to provide feedback on the ongoing projects, register for the Face to Face if possible, and adjourned the meeting.

27 June Meeting Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Bim, Shadi, Sharron, Kevin, EricE, Helle, Andrew, Howard, Wayne
  • Regrets: Jan, AnnaBelle, Paul (No survey results from Anthony, Liam, Wayne)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Jonathan, July 07, 2014
  • [done] Anna Belle, Aug 07, 2014

20 June 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. WCAG-EM Report Tool
  2. WCAG-EM final review coming next week - who will review it?
  3. Tutorials
  4. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility
  5. EOWG comments on longdesc - confirm we're satisfied with the edits.
  6. Reminder: EOWG f2f Monday & Tuesday 27-28 October 2014 in California, with W3C TPAC - registration open

Summary

20 June Minutes

Wilco Fiers was introduced to EO participants. Wilco is leading the Auto-WCAG Community Group, formed to develop automated WCAG monitoring and testing. Shadi led the next discussion about the WCAG-EM Report Tool. Shadi asked participants to review the prototype of the tool on GitHub and comment, bearing in mind that the purpose of the tools is both to give new evaluators a good foundation to jump right in as well as to provide experienced evaluators with an integrated approach. Next was a reminder that final review comments are due for WCAG-EM, considerably revised with EO input and other public comments. If EO participants have more to say, do it now. Next up was a review of the response to EO comments on longdescription. There were no objections voiced and Bim was going to do a final review after the meeting ended. Shawn reminded all of the upcoming Face 2 Face Meeting at TPAC - registration is open, please respond as soon as you know whether you can attend. Shawn also asked for input early next week on the Personas within the Planning and Managing accessibility wiki. Finally, Eric updated the group on the progress of WAI Tutorials and asked for continued input.

Participants

  • Present: Shadi, Shawn, EricE, Jon, Wilco, Bim, LiamM, Kevin, Andrew, Wayne, Howard
  • Regrets: Jan, Paul, Sharron, AnnaBelle, Vicki, Helle (No survey results from Anthony, Liam)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Sharron, June 25, 2014
  • [done], Helle, June 27 2014
  • [done], Anna Belle, Aug. 7 2014

13 June 2014 teleconference

Agenda

Summary

Meeting was centrally focused on the recent work on the Table Tutorials and the comments received from WCAG-WG and others. Simple tables were redefined to be those that do not require scope. Examples were organized within that definition and rearranged. It was agreed to emphasize best practice as well as making clear what were WCAG requirements. There was extensive discussion about the information flow, how scope and headings are addressed, and how to promote a clear understanding among developers that as tables are made easier to understand for people with cognitive disabilities we also solve other problems. Helle, Jan, and Andrew will look for research and suggest possible wording for making that point. Next, Kevin announced that he has reviewed existing resources for planning and managing and is making notes for consideration and discussion. The idea is to review existing documents, some of which have not as yet been published and to identify what is missing to develop them further. Other documents are proposed to help organizations meet the requirements for accessible ICT. The goal will be to develop personas and then craft the resources to meet the needs of as many of them as possible. Existing personas have been consolidated into six basic personas who will benefit from these resources. EO is asked to review and comment. Shadi then introduced the features list for an Interactive Guide for Web Evaluations and asked for group input. Shawn thanked everyone and the meeting adjourned.

13 June Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Kevin, Sharron, Shawn, Bim, EricE, AnnaBelle, Jonathan, Jan, Paul, Andrew, Shadi, Helle, Sylvie Duchateau
  • Regrets: Wayne, Denis, Vicki, Howard (No survey results from Anthony, Liam)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done], Howard, June 19, 2014 (Reviewed minutes - will read summary when posted)
  • [done], name, date

6 June 2014 teleconference

Agenda

Summary

The meeting began with brief introductions of new EO participants Jonathan Metz and Kevin White. The rest of meeting was spent considering the WCAG-WG comments on the Tutorials. Eric brought to EO those comments that needed group considerations including the following:

  • Tables Tutorials organization: Noting that the overlap was not entirely clear between "simple" tables and those we have called "irregular" or "complex," WCAG-WG suggested reorganization. Discussion included consideration of how far a tutorial should go in explaining the difference between how code should render and the inadequacies of certain AT and/or browsers. Recognizing the need to separate best practice from requirements, it was agreed that Eric will draft a revision in which is used alone only on the first example, will introduce <scope> in second example and will pull in Example 1 from "Irregular."
  • Image Maps: The question here was whether the Note that image maps do not always render properly on mobile and the attendant suggestion of redundant links was seen by WCAG-WG as unnecessary due to it being a more general problem rather than a specific accessibility barrier. After Bim's observation that a mandate for WAI-ACT was to address mobile technologies, EO decided to keep the reference with some modification and Eric will justify the decision based on discussion.
  • Table Summary: Comment was that HTML summary attribute should not be given such emphasis and HTML5 solutions could be given more. Eric will include more varied ways to provide table summary.
  • ARIA references The comment from WCAG-WG began with a note about groups of images which was then generalized to include a desire for more ARIA references throughout. EOWG agreed to better clarify that it is OK to use ARIA with HTML4 and that it will probably render OK with most browsers and AT but you may have code validation errors. We also expect that as the topics become more complex, we will use ARIA references in context and as appropriate.
  • Cognitive Load: Discussion tabled until next week when AndrewA will be at the meeting
  • FAQ for Images Tutorial: Considered Shadi's suggestion to have a Q to address the question of text-only sites. Agreed if it is worded so as *NOT* to inadvertently reinforce the myth that it is a good accessibility solution.

EOWG participants are advised to stay alert to Eric's edits this week and be available to respond quickly. Thanks all!

06 June Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Kevin, Sharron, Shawn, Bim, EricE, AnnaBelle, Jonathan, Jan, Paul, Howard, Sylvie Duchateau
  • Regrets: Wayne, Andrew, Shadi, Denis, Helle, Vicki. (No survey results from Anthony, Liam)

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Wayne, 9 June 2014
  • [done], Helle, 13 June 2014
  • [done], Andrew, 13 June 2014
  • [done], name, date

30 May 2014 teleconference

Agenda

Summary

The Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG) met with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (WCAG WG) to discuss and reach consensus on wording that EOWG previously submitted for Understanding WCAG.

Background: Techniques for Specific Technologies has notes on EOWG's original discussion, EOWG proposed wording, WCAG WG's edited wording, and EOWG's additional discussion.

Judy Brewer acted as neutral facilitator, allowing co-chairs to participate in the discussion without having to represent their full WGs. After much discussion, the following language was agreed upon, with the caveat that today's participants must seek approval from their full groups:

Publication of techniques for a specific technology does not imply that the technology can be used in all situations to create content that meets WCAG 2.0 success criteria and conformance criteria. Developers need to be aware of the limitations of specific technologies and provide content in a way that is accessible to people with disabilities.

[post meeting note: "conformance criteria" should be "conformance requirements"]

EO further suggested that the language be placed in numerous instances where specific technology techniques were offered. By the time this was suggested, however, several WCAG reps had left the meeting and after a brief exchange of perspectives on that question, it was determined that EO would submit the suggestion as a separate matter for WCAG consideration. Judy thanked everyone and she and remaining WCAG participants left the meeting.

EO participants remained to discuss the timeline and extended deadline for participants to complete the Tutorials surveys. Shawn asked that everyone be sure to do that and to provide as well edit suggestions for the main Tutorials landing page with marketing and messaging in mind. Suggestions are welcome on GitHub and/or on the wiki or by email to the list.

30 May minutes

Participants

  • Present: Bruce Bailey, Judy Brewer, AnnaBelle, David MacDonald, Shawn, Paul Schantz, Sharron, Andrew Kirkpatrick, Sylvie Duchateau, Joshue, Marc Johlic, Andrew Arch, Michael Cooper, Howard Kramer, Denis Boudreau, Liam M, Jan, Wayne
  • Regrets: Eric, Shadi, Bim, Helle, Vicki
  • Availability survey empty: Anthony

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Vicki, June 3, 2014
  • [done] Helle, 13 June 2014
  • [done], name, date

23 May 2014 teleconference

Agenda

Summary

Shadi led the meeting and began by observing how few people had managed to complete the survey. He and Eric asked if participants would be able to meet an extended deadline for completing the acceptance questionnaires for the Tutorial work to date. Those in attendance agreed that they would meet the deadline which was extended to June 2 with strong encouragement to complete before that date. Looking at the comments that were made, the group discussed copyedits to the Concepts page of the Tables section, improvements to the Irregular Tables section, considered a suggestion to say sometimes tables are "impossible" rather than "hard" to understand, and more. Considering the overall Tutorials introduction, it was determined that greater emphasis is needed of the fact that for many content providers the CMS will become an important determining factor of success. Rather than try to make disclaimers throughout the tutorials, it was suggested to make a stronger case on the overall Tutorials introduction with supporting references in the individual topics as needed. Tables is an example where accessibility features made with an authoring tool may not be carried over in conversion to the web. In addition, there was support for encouraging Project Managers to think about the Tutorials as a way to provide leadership and resources to their teams. In closing, Eric asks for specific comments on the alt text of the table icons as people do their review. Shadi thanked Eric for his dedication and progress and gave kudos all around to how the group works together.

23 May minutes

Participants

  • Present:
  • Regrets:
  • Availability survey empty:

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Shawn, 28 May 2014
  • [done], Helle 13 June 2014
  • [done], name, date

16 May 2014 Teleconference

Agenda

  1. Tutorials - discuss:
  2. IndieUI Requirements - discuss EOWG comment on use cases not scenarios
  3. Availability for Upcoming EOWG Teleconferences & discussion with WCAG WG on Techniques for Technologies wording & location on 30 May or 6 June

Summary

In review of the Tables Tutorials the group was generally pleased with how the icons have evolved. Suggestions were made for possible alternatives to positioning, link status, number of icons for each example, bulleted text and more. On the question of linked icons, it was agreed that there should be no linking to internal page content, but rather to the general background and overview of each table type. Eric quickly mocked up examples for all to see and it was agreed to make clickable icons, floated left, with only one example of each type, and no bullets.

Consideration was given to the question of the opening language being "too scary" for those who are not coders. Several said that, well, in fact it IS for coders and don't want to try to make the language so simple it is no longer useful to primary audience. All agreed that language could be clarified and somewhat simplified without being dumbed down. Goal is to be useful to primary users while being less intimidating to users of CMS who may not be coders. Discussion of series of large chain link images with "Permalink" designation in alt text led to conclusion that first the large images were distracting and second the term permalink may be confusing to many. Eric will work on alternative visual presentation and wording. The Tutorials cover page emphasis was to be copy edited with an emphasis on the goal of these materials to help make the web "more accessible to all users."

The group agreed to recommend to Indie-UI the use of the term "use case" throughout and that they NOT use scenario. Most availability for co-meeting with WCAG-WG was May 30. Shawn reminded everyone to stay alert to comments on the wiki and to complete the questionnaire.

16 May 2014 Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Sharron, Bim, AnnaBelle, Shawn, EricE, Paul, Wayne, Jan, Sylvie, Vicki
  • Regrets: Helle, Shadi, Howard, Andrew
  • Availability survey empty: Liam, Anthony

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] {Andrew, 2014.05.30}
  • [done] Helle 13 June 2014
  • [done], name, date

9 May 2014 Teleconference

Agenda

  1. Tables tutorial - discuss any open issues (which Eric will prepare for discussion)
  2. Coming soon: "WBS" questionnaires for approval to publish Tutorials cover page, Images Tutorial, Tables Tutorial - please schedule time for these
  3. IndieUI Requirements -
  4. Worksession - for those who want to refine the Tutorials cover page

Summary

The first discussion and majority of meeting time was devoted to the Tutorials - examining the open issues from the Tables Tutorial and wrapping up the Images Tutorial comments. There was some discussion of the Tables thumbnail icons, how detailed they should be, how they should be placed, and what alt text was appropriate. Eric thanked AnnaBelle for her excellent copy-edits to the Images Tutorials and felt confident that Images is in good shape for final review. Shawn told everyone to look for a questionnaire and to please make the time to complete it since the goal is to have these completed in may. With the expectation that there will be more comments, suggested changes to Tables Tutorials, Eric asked that those be the priority when completing the questionnaire. Next was a discussion of the Indie-UI Requirements draft and Wayne's comments. Some general comments from Wayne and Liam will be submitted by them as individuals and Sharron took the action to submit one comment from the group. That is the observation that terms "use case" and "scenario" seem to be used randomly. We propose that Indie-UI refer only to "use cases" since that is the more accurate term in this context. Finally, for those who are more productive in working group activities, some participants remained to discuss the Tutorials Cover Page and others left to work on their own.

9 May 2014 Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Sharron, Wayne, Bim, EricE, Jan, Andrew, LiamM
  • Regrets: Shadi, Helle, AnnaBelle, Sylvie
  • Availability survey empty: Anthony, Howard, Paul

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] {Sylvie, 6 June, 2014}
  • [done] Helle 13 June 2014
  • [done], name, date

2 May 2014 Worksession

Optional worksession to review Tables tutorial. Put changes in GitHub or comments in Tables wiki page.

2 May 2014 worksession notes

25 April 2014 teleconference

Agenda

  1. Tables tutorial - discuss issues in Tables wiki page
  2. IndieUI Requirements - volunteers to review (and/or comment on "use cases" versus "scenarios"): Wayne, ?
  3. EO work focusing on Tutorials - plan your 2 hours for that most weeks

Summary

In looking at Eric's progress on the Tables tutorial, Shawn noted that only she and Vicki had made documented comments. Helle said she had looked at the Table Tutorial but had trouble navigating the GitHub interface. Shawn reminded everyone they could still use the wiki and/or email to comment. Eric suggested the group take a look now during the meeting and offer comments. One major concern is the question of how to promote best practice (for example with table captions) while making the distinction clear between what is required and what is recommended as a best practice. Discussion included the observation that loading the tutorials with disclaimers and W3C "normative" jargon could seriously undermine the pedagogy of these which are meant to be teaching documents. The group agreed that we want to avoid "noise:" and yet we must make the distinction clear. Several suggestions were offered and Eric will incorporate them for group consideration. Concern was offered as well about the use of terms like "ambiguous tables," Multi-level tables" etc and the group asked for greater clarity, suggesting perhaps the use of "irregular." Next was Shawn's request for volunteers to review the draft of "Indie-UI" with particular attention to the way they reference "use cases" and "scenarios." Jan, Helle and Wayne agreed to review. Helle asked that meeting dates be put back on the EO home page, it was agreed to do so. Sharron asked for an update on the WAI response to a request for anayltics. Shawn said Sharron and Liam should submit the questions that they want answered and she will see what we can do. Denis asked for a meeting to continue the Tables tutorial review in real time as a group and they settled on a time on May 2 for anyone wishing to join.

25 April 2014 Minutes

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Sharron, EricE, Shadi, Helle, Jan, Denis, Bim, PaulSchantz, Wayne
  • Regrets: Sylvie, Andrew
  • Availability survey empty: Liam, Howard, Anthony

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] {Vicki, June 3, 2014}
  • [done] {name, date}

18 April 2014 - no teleconference

11 April 2014

Agenda

  1. ATAG promo debrief and ATAG status update
  2. Introduction for those interested in providing GitHub Tutorial feedback and a review of Tutorials feedback on the EO wiki
  3. Procurement Resources - discuss draft and what's needed before moving it to WAI-Engage wiki
  4. Review and discuss content of Finding Your WAI page. "New Resources" are not so new...and what else could be improved from an outreach perspective?
  5. Discuss Michael Ellidge's suggestion for Easy Checks on WAI-editors list
  6. Actions reminders
    • Each week, search for your name. Then search for highlighted words "Who else:" Complete items that are marked "Everyone". If time and interest, do things indicated "Anyone".
    • When you miss a meeting, read summary on this page and add your name as [done]

Summary

First on the agenda was to hear from Jeanne about the ATAG outreach at CSUN with the buttons and cards. Jeanne reported great success, more than 13 people volunteered to test and more applications are still coming in. She now has more than 20 testers. Implementation outreach was good as well, although they are slower to be finalized. Jeanne is hoping for implementers using Drupal and Wayne and Paul will help her find those within CSU system. Andrew will put Jeanne in touch with Drupal authors using modules for accessibility. Jeanne thanks ed everyone for their efforts and will consider what else to ask EO for, including the possibility of creating a WAI-Engage project to keep the momentum moving forward and to manage volunteer engagement. Next Eric reviewed the ways to comment on the Tutorials, first through GitHub Tutorial feedback and second through the Tutorials feedback page of the EO wiki. Links to the specific tutorials as well as GitHub links are maintained on that wiki page. Eric emphasized that no one needs to feel obligated to participate in GitHub, although Liam encouraged everyone to try, especially for editing typos and other trivial items. Wayne introduced the fact that GitHub was actually easier for him to navigate than the wiki. He requested that all EO participants try to do their EO homework within the wiki enlarged to 200%. Eric has sent Wayne a revised styles sheet and we will check in to see how that is working. Sylvie and Bim emphasized the fact that dates and clear sectioning help navigate the wiki with a screenreader.

Next the group considered the status of the Procurement Resources wiki page and its readiness to go to WAI-Engage. Sharron voiced a concern that we have not had success putting things on WAI-Engage in the past and would like EO to think about how to launch it with incentives for participation. Sharron and Wayne will talk with procurement people in universities and state agencies to see if we can get commitment to participate when the project moves to the public wiki. The next item was a consideration the Finding Your WAI page on the main WAI website. Highlighted items are dated and we need to think about the purpose of the page and how well it is succeeding. What does this page do that is not done on Getting Started, the site map, or What's New? EO participants are asked to comment on the YourWAI wiki page. In the meantime, Eric will ask Shawn and Shadi about including some open source analytic tools. Next the group considered the response to an EasyChecks solution posted to WAI editor's list and agreed to thank Michael for his input and add his suggestions to a list of future improvements. The meeting ended with a reminder that EO will not meet on April 18th.

Participants

  • Present: Sharron, Jeanne, Jan, Wayne, Eric, Bim, Sylvie, Paul, Andrew, Liam,
  • Regrets: Shawn, Shadi, AnnaBelle, Denis, Vicki, Helle
  • Availability survey empty: Howard, Anthony

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Shawn, 15 April 2014
  • [done] Helle, 23 April 2014
  • [done] Vicki, 24 April 2014
  • [done] Anna Belle, 29 April 2014

04 April 2014

Agenda

  1. Resources for|on Alternative Text for Images - Draft page comments in wiki
  2. Easy Checks disclaimer - discuss comments and finalize
  3. Evaluation Tool Guidance - discuss new title idea
  4. Tutorials cover page - discuss comments in wiki and Github as needed
  5. Tutorial Concepts - debrief from F2F and discuss ideas
  6. (if time) Procurement Resources - plan for developing it more and moving it to WAI-Engage wiki
  7. Actions reminders
    • Every week, search for your name. Then search for "Who else:", which is highlighted and do all things indicated "Everyone". If time and interest, do things indicated "Anyone".
    • When you miss a meeting, read the Sharron's ever so helpful summary on this page and add your name as [done]

Summary

We tabled the first agenda item, the discussion of the HTML5 Images resource page, until Mark could join, later in the meeting. Next on the agenda was consideration of the Easy Checks disclaimer. Discussion resolved with approval of the shaded box for the text but a decision to place the disclaimer in just one location on the page, right before the Expand All option. Otherwise the feeling was that it creates to much visual noise and distraction if placed in front of each and every check. Next was a discussion of wiki Eval tool comments regarding the title of the Tool Developer Guide. EO felt that the title had been significantly improved to be "Developer (or Developer's or Developers')Guide to Features of Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools" and left the final grammatical decision to Shadi's WG to decide. Also approved the acronym "WAET Guide." Next up was a discussion of the Tutorials cover page and a recap of the Tutorials Concept work done at CSUN F2F. Eric appreciated the wiki input and asked for everyone to continue adding thoughts and comments. Discussion followed about the additions and final disposition of the Procurement Resources on the EO wiki. While the intent is to polish the page a bit more and add to the WAI-Engage wiki, questions arose about how to promote wider participation. Citing lack of response to past efforts to engage people through WAI-Engage, a need was expressed to develop a more active outreach effort if we try this again. Sharron and Wayne will reach out to people they know with procurement responsibility to try to get their commitment of active engagement before we post the resource to WAI-Engage. In the meantime EO participants are encouraged to continue to post resources.

Mark joined the call and thanked EO for the wiki comments. He debriefed the group on the background of the HTML5 Images guide and the group expressed their appreciation of the document. Suggestions were made including: consider expanding the topics that are covered by this type of resource; if so, provide an additional folder with a common root; consider if there is a relationship to yourWAI; if so consider page type more closely related to Tutorials or WAI. Mark said there was little chance that other topics could be included at this time since HTML5 is progressing rapidly but will take suggestions for future consideration.

The meeting closed with a discussion of the new EO wiki structure, specifically the consolidation of meeting agendas, minute summaries and action items. While this is generally acceptable and even preferable for most participants, some expressed a preference for having at least some brief info about meetings on the EO home page. Additional discussion of the wiki in general surfaced problems with way-finding - what is supposed be commented upon and where to comment? - as well as the fact that pages grow to unwieldy lengths and become hard to navigate. Wayne reminded the group that he was entirely unable to navigate or use the wiki and felt that he missed a great deal of interaction - comments and responses - by being unable to use the wiki platform. Sharron will take these matters up with Shawn and welcomes further input about how to manage participation.

Participants

  • Present: Sharron, Shadi, Wayne, Denis, Eric, Bim, Vicki, Sylvie, Howard, Jan, Andrew, Liam, Helle, Mark_Sadecki
  • Regrets: Shawn, AnnaBelle,
  • Availability survey empty: Suzette, Anthony, Emmanuelle, Howard

Read summary & skimmed minutes (people who missed the meeting):

  • [done] Shawn, 15 April 2014
  • [done] Anna Belle, 29 April 2014

28 March 2014

Agenda

  1. CSUN debrief
  2. Easy Checks - discuss March changes
  3. Alt guidance - OK for EOWG to be in critical path?
  4. Evaluation tool guidance - comments on Features of web accessibility evaluation tools: Guidance on the development and selection of tools
  5. Procurement Resources - discuss issues with seeding WAI-Engage wiki page
  6. Techniques for Specific Technologies - comment for April discussion
  7. Actions reminders - every week, search for your name, then search for "Who else:", which is highlighted.
  8. Availability for Upcoming EOWG Teleconferences - why not filling out?

Summary

The meeting began with a recap of CSUN highlights shared by those who had attended, including increased attention to procurement resources, great interest in Easy Checks, and a general feeling that the field was maturing. Because there was such low attendance at the F2F, the group must consider whether we want to plan to meet at CSUN again next year (so that space can be reserved) or pass and find other venues for face to face meetings. Next Shadi asked the group to consider the development of a new document for helping toolmakers include accessibility evaluation features. Shadi particularly asked for help with the framing of the document, especially the title, the abstract and the introduction. The group brainstormed titles that more clearly targeted the audience of tools makers. Discussion followed about seeding the WAI-Engage wiki with policy and procurement resources. Caution was expressed about being clear that this is not legal advice and to steer clear of contract language. Otherwise, the idea seems useful and will be pursued. In exploring why the availability survey was not being completed, we found several people locked out from their log-in. Once that is solved, Shawn urged everyone to keep the EO participant attendance survey up to date. Next the group looked at the newly organized EO wiki and associated actions - now structured by topic rather than by person. Members are encouraged to visit the wiki once or twice a week, search for your name associated with a topic and then search for "Who Else." If it says everyone, a response is required; if it says anyone, you are encouraged to comment - even to agree with previous comments or say you have no opinion. Going forward, the meeting agendas and summaries will also be found on the wiki for your convenience.

In Techniques for Specific Technologies, read Background and Notes. Comment under "Additional Discussion on Wording" and "Location". (+1 is enough of a comment)

Rough minutes 28-March-2014

Participants

  • Present: Shawn, Sharron, Jan, Andrew, PaulSchantz, Bim, Helle, Shadi, Howard (second part)
  • Regrets: AnnaBelle, Vicki, Howard, Eric, Liam, Sylvie, Wayne
  • Availability survey empty: Wayne, Denis

Read summary & skimmed minutes:

  • [done] Vicki, 24-April-2014
  • [done] Anna Belle, 29-April-2014

Previous meetings

Prior to 28 March 2014, agendas and summaries are only included in the Minutes, which are listed in the EOWG Minutes Archive.

Retrieved from "https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/index.php?title=EOWG_Meetings_2014&oldid=11556"