Cannes-Mandelieu, France
We discussed the following words.
Natural languages – we are willing to use the definition from WEAG. Replace our definition with theirs in the glossary.
Equivalent Alternative – no changes to current EO definition except minor changes from yesterday.
Alternate version – WCAG definition. We think the word ‘content’ should be version. In order to pick up up functionality as information.
Captions: add to our definition that captions are with or below a multimedia presentation. Include the note about sub-titles. Make our definition more succinct. Remove the reference to ‘equivalent alternative’. Suggest that they use our definition without the ‘for examples’.
Transcript: change ’and such’ to ‘etc.’ Differentiate.
Analog time-dependent input: The definition was not clear to the group. It
was difficult to read and understand. For instance the ‘outcome of the
input ‘ was abstract.
Baseline: Use the definition exclusively without the notes. Add a pointer to the discussion of baseline. We suggest removing the notes because this is a difficult issue for many people and the notes do not fully explain it.
Content: Send a question that asks: What is not included as ‘content’? Based on our understanding, of your definition could be as follows ‘ information on Web pages or other primary resources that are used by the user agent.
Idiomatic expressions: Give feedback to WCAG. Remove the example. Is this definition really needed or can it be eliminated?
Luminosity: Suggest that WCAG add a sentence at the start of their definition that says ‘Luminosity deals with color contract and brightness. More precisely it is . . . Need to define luminosity.
Judy gives background. Discusses several things. Two slide sets. One that deals with a basic overview that gives the general business case for web accessibility. This would be more of a ‘grab & go’ general presentation. The second would be more of a ‘how to’ that would
Judy reviews her notes and very rough draft of the ‘how to’ draft of the presentation.
Planning your business case – Provide with actions and particular alternatives as some questions.
Identifying a variety of groups that may be new to web accessibility and have needs to have
It would be nice to have examples of evaluations.
Note: if you are searching for ‘legal’ on the EO site, you will not find policy.
Put a 1 page summary that describes how people with disabilities use the web. For example, some with visual impairments would use a screen reader, people with a hearing impairment would use text captioning, etc.
Tell the scope of what is covered and what is not covered on the site and where to go for things are not covered.
Need information about skills needed for web developers to make a web site accessibility.
Need information that provides training about web accessibility.
May need a 1 page that gives a summary of how people use the web for people with disabilities.
May need to make it more explicit in terms of a document that talks about all the reasons to include things to have web accessibility for other people.
To make a site web accessibility all that is needed is to make Text only.
Question: How important are ‘newbies’ vs advanced? Several people think ‘newbies’ are probably more important because resources exist for ‘advanced’.
In terms of priorities for E&O. Perhaps we especially need to work on those things that are most practical in supporting those people who are part of the ground swell from the groung up.
To make a site web accessibility all that is needed is to make Text only.
Question: How important are ‘newbies’ vs advanced? Several people think ‘newbies’ are probably more important because resources exist for ‘advanced’.
In terms of priorities for E&O. Perhaps we especially need to work on those things that are most practical in supporting those people who are part of the ground swell from the groung up.
Refresh from previous discussions, and note new trends and issues.
Also :