Survey Permissions (was Re: Low vision task force draft minutes for 3 February 2016)

Hi all,

I get "Not allowed...You're not allowed to see the results of this
questionnaire" for
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/81151/LVR_FPWD/results

Are the results are supposed to be viewable to group members?

Thanks.

Kindest Regards,
Laura

On 2/3/16, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
> Please find the draft minutes at the link below (pasted in the email as
> well).
>
> https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html
>
> Jonathan
>
> [W3C]<http://www.w3.org/>
>
> - DRAFT -
> Low Vision Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
> 03 Feb 2016
>
> See also: IRC log<http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-irc>
>
> Attendees
> Present
> jon_avila, awk, shawn, JohnR, wayne
> Regrets
> Laura
> Chair
> AWK
> Scribe
> AWK, Jon
> Contents
>
>   *   Topics<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#agenda>
>      *   update attendance
> survey<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#item01>
>      *   Survey:
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/81151/LVR_FPWD/<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#item02>
>      *   Survey (only questions 4, 8, and 9):
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/81151/UserNeeds-Jan-27/results<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#item03>
>      *   7. Terminology: color vision
> deficiencies<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#item04>
>   *   Summary of Action
> Items<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#ActionSummary>
>   *   Summary of
> Resolutions<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary>
>
> ________________________________
>
> <JohnRochford> WebEx tells me I am the first person to join the meeting.
>
> <AWK> Trackbot, start meeting
>
> <trackbot> Meeting: Low Vision Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
>
> <trackbot> Date: 03 February 2016
>
> <AWK> Scribe: AWK
> update attendance survey
>
> AWK: Everyone should complete the survey. Everyone on this call has, but as
> a general notice to the group
>
> +Shawn
>
> <JohnRochford> +JohnRochford
> Survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/81151/LVR_FPWD/
>
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/81151/LVR_FPWD/results
>
> Alan's comment on survey re: ACB document
>
> AWK: We discussed and it seems that most issues are covered
>
> SLH: We didn't do a comprehensive review. We should talk to Alan about this
> ... to determine what he thinks is missing
>
> <scribe> Scribe: Jon
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: question of Jon about printing - in my case a tiny doc
> may print a book - I change the way it appears on screen before printing.
> Some people need document in paper before they can understand it.
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: encourage you to look at survey on user needs
>
> <jon_avila> Shawn: some people don't need it. Other people do -- perhaps
> with the intersection of cognitive disabilities and low vision.
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: not sure if we want to put a lot of work into that
> section now since most of it would have many different disclaimers. Printing
> format may be different from format they have it displayed on screen. Two
> styles may be used one for screen and one for print.
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: basically it says you can change the text and then print
> it. So it accounts for that.
>
> <jon_avila> awk: ACB document seems to suggest rigid requirements and what
> we are suggesting is better as someone may not want some of the items listed
> here.
>
> <jon_avila> awk: example, never use italices and always use asterisks for
> emphasis. That may be true for some people and there may be capabilities
> through CSS but that might not matter for some people.
>
> <jon_avila> awk: ACB docs says page numbers are in upper right -- that would
> be harder to do as that may be hard to target. That might be harder and some
> pages don't have page numbers -- but on printed versions browser can control
> that.
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: need action to see what we have covered and what we don't
> and what we want to do about it?
>
> <scribe> ACTION: AWK to do a detailed review with Alan of the ACB document
> and whether there is a delta relative to the LV requirements doc [recorded
> in http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#action01]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-32 - Do a detailed review with alan of the acb
> document and whether there is a delta relative to the lv requirements doc
> [on Andrew Kirkpatrick - due 2016-02-10].
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: goal of ACB doc is to make document readable by most
> number of people
>
> <Wayne> ACTION: Wayne to look up the ACB document and determine if it is the
> newest. [recorded in
> http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#action02]
>
> <trackbot> Created ACTION-33 - Look up the acb document and determine if it
> is the newest. [on Wayne Dick - due 2016-02-10].
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: gave action to myself to make sure it is the newest
> published one
>
> <jon_avila> awk: looks like 2012 was the publication date of the ACB
> document from a quick search
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: One I was looking at best practice and guidelines for
> large print documents....
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: different organizations guides may conflict
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: ACB giudelines have good list of citations
>
> <jon_avila> johnR: Katie and I are both on congitive and lvtf - wonder if
> she and I can contribute to synching the overlap
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: information for cognitive and low vision sometimes have
> aspects that are similar for some people. Did that get in the COG TF
> materials?
>
> <jon_avila> awk: regarding your comments -- are these things we need to do
> before publication?
>
> <jon_avila> awk: be granular and comments in your pull request what has to
> be done immeidately or what can wait
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: can put exact references of where things come from
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: let's skim the email from Judy
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: we will likely have some references in the document
> itself
>
> <jon_avila> awk: Judy says categorical statement should be qualified - say
> for some people
>
> <jon_avila> awk: we can scrub the document for these
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: spacing is an issue for all people including those
> without low vision
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: article on print size matter and why newspaper choose
> formats
>
> <jon_avila> awk: could be other locations in the document where we need to
> qualify
>
> <jon_avila> awk: need ciation for visual changes around age 40
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: we need to separate out CSS, images, and others into
> separate files to follow W3C style guidelines
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: not online right now but will dig up reference
>
> <jon_avila> awk: we will scrub the document and look for missing references
> and get appropriate reference styles in place
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: would save time if you put link and @@ marker in
>
> <JohnRochford> I found the "W3 Manual of Style" at
> https://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/
>
> <jon_avila> awk: Judy's comments on anchoring concept that this applies to
> web
>
> <jon_avila> awk: scope of it is electronic documents and information and not
> the world
>
> Current first sentence of introduction: This document describes what people
> with low vision need for web content, tools, and technologies to be
> accessible.
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: good questions -- line is so blurry between documents and
> web. Broader of definition without going beyond our boundary are would be
> good
>
> <jon_avila> awk: first paragraph and abstract makes it clear that this only
> applies to web
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: do we feel that web is broad enough as we have tools and
> technologies in addition to content
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: WCAG to non-web ICT. Is a Word document web? Is a mobile
> app web? If appropriate it would be nice to have it be appropriately broad
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: have to step away for a minute
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: we can really claim being the authoritative source -- not
> sure if we claim for other formats.
>
> <jon_avila> johnR: are we expanding our mandate and how much work would be
> invovled in that.
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: user needs can be one thing and then separately what is
> missing from WCAG, UAAG, ATAG, etc. User docs can have broader scope if we
> want that.
>
> <jon_avila> awk: would be concern if this would be applied to non electronic
> document or built environment. But what we are discussing in web would seem
> to apply to Word document or mobile UI
>
> <jon_avila> awk: not sure if I share the same concern. Is that concern for
> non-web ICT or beyond that?
>
> <jon_avila> awk: reason non-web ICT exists because US Access Board says WCAG
> works good for documents and apps - so we needed a document that explains
> how and provides specifics
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: broad issues doeson't commit us to create techniques or
> success criteria for other platforms
>
> <jon_avila> awk: for example, would be difficult for us to write success
> criteria that would apply to electronic light switches, etc.
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: concern that people could say document apply to documents
> or apps because it says web
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: want to make it easy for people to realize lv
> requirements across platforms and not have excuse and not add unnecessary
> work later.
>
> <jon_avila> wayne: I agree, I'd like to see it phrased nicely.
>
> <jon_avila> awk: Judy has one more minor requirement
> Survey (only questions 4, 8, and 9):
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/81151/UserNeeds-Jan-27/results
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: go to number 7 in survey
> 7. Terminology: color vision deficiencies
>
> <jon_avila> awk: be careful about terms such as defficiencies, some people
> say color vision
>
> <jon_avila> shawn: submitted pull request. We can send email to see if
> people agree to them?
>
> <jon_avila> awk: change seem editorial as long as the terms are positioned
> properly and are respectful.
>
> <jon_avila> awk: Is there is any objections to change color vision for title
> and then reference to defficiences when appririate and respectful
>
> <jon_avila> trackbot, end meeting
>
> RESOLUTION: Follow Jim and Shawn's suggestion in the survey
>
> Summary of Action Items
> [NEW] ACTION: AWK to do a detailed review with Alan of the ACB document and
> whether there is a delta relative to the LV requirements doc [recorded in
> http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#action01]
> [NEW] ACTION: Wayne to look up the ACB document and determine if it is the
> newest. [recorded in
> http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#action02]
>
> Summary of Resolutions
>
>   1.  Follow Jim and Shawn's suggestion in the
> survey<https://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html#resolution01>
> [End of minutes]
> ________________________________
> Minutes formatted by David Booth's
> scribe.perl<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm>
> version 1.144 (CVS log<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/>)
> $Date: 2016/02/03 16:35:04 $
> ________________________________
> Scribe.perl diagnostic output
> [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
>
> This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144  of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34
>
> Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
>
>
>
> Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
>
>
>
> Found Scribe: AWK
>
> Inferring ScribeNick: AWK
>
> Found Scribe: Jon
>
> Scribes: AWK, Jon
>
> Default Present: shawn, jon_avila, Wayne, JohnRochford
>
>
>
> WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: jon_avila, Wayne)
>
> Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
>
> such as: <dbooth> Present+ Shawn, AWK, Wayne, Jon_Avila, JohnRochford
>
>
>
>
>
> WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: Shawn, AWK, Wayne,
> Jon_Avila, JohnRochford)
>
> Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
>
> such as: <dbooth> Present+ jon_avila, awk, shawn, JohnR, wayne
>
>
>
> Present: jon_avila awk shawn JohnR wayne
>
> Regrets: Laura
>
> Found Date: 03 Feb 2016
>
> Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-lvtf-minutes.html
>
> People with action items: awk wayne
>
>
> [End of
> scribe.perl<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm>
> diagnostic output]
>
>
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
> 703.637.8957 (o)
> Follow us: Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/#!/ssbbartgroup> |
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/#!/SSBBARTGroup> |
> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> |
> Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter<http://eepurl.com/O5DP>
>
>


-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2016 18:24:17 UTC