See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: Shadi
[participants say "hi"]
slh: checking-in on various developments, looking forward to exchanging knowledge
<Jack> Greetings everyone!
aa: in Australia coming close to
establishing a committee, was hard to organize
... aim is to formally participate in activities like JTC-1
etc
... and to be able to adopt national and international
standards
jb: had various discussions on
many of these issues during the past
... bringing pieces together to coordinate some of the
developments
... may feed into the policy developments and/or stds
harmonization pages
<shawn> Why Standards Harmonization is Essential to Web Accessibility http://www.w3.org/WAI/Policy/harmon (reply to Helle -- although hopefully it is fairly easy to find on the WAi web site ! ;)
jb: intention is to promote stds
harmonization and give and update to people
... encourage people to send comments and questions to the
list
... to try and address these during future calls
... TEITAC was convened by US Access Board in September
2006
... a follow on effort from a Federal Advisory Committee
... to refresh the technical standard for Section 508
... to update the technology requirements and to harmonize with
international standards
... W3C applied and was nominated as one of the groups to be
represented at TEITAC
... participation also from different entities including
disability organization, industries, and international
participation
... particularly from EU, Australia, Japan
<Andrew> JB: membership of TEITAC - http://teitac.org/wiki/Committee_members
jb: and Candada
... TEITAC is advisory, not a legislative body
... anticipated to go to November 2007
... could take longer but people want it wrapped up soon
... TEITAC is actually updating two parts -Section 255
Telecomunication, and Section 508
... trying to update them together to align them
... many different sub-committies, including Web &
Software
... link in the agenda gives good background
... hope to be able to reference WCAG 2.0
<Andrew> JB: TEITAC subcommittees - http://teitac.org/wiki/TEITAC_Wiki#Subcommittees
jb: also discussions on UAAG and ATAG but not as optimistic to have a direct referencing
hb: is there acceptance for 508 amongst developers? often there was little interest in implementing 508 by developers
jb: developers *in* TEITAC are
pretty supportive organizations
... Section 508 is more of an incentive approach
... if you implement accessibility, then the government more
likely to buy your products
wl: often the initial impact of
directives and legislation is hight but then slows down
... sometimes little knowledge to implement accessibility
... however, the current amount of laws and legislations in
different countries such as the US or the EU is very
promising
... momentum is well under way, light at the end of the tunnel,
can't stop it anymore
jb: Section 508 had a huge
ripple-effect in many countries and raised awareness
... education work in WAI and else where got real lift through
media coverage
... optimistic about the progress
wd: in CA where they tied their law to 508, it had significant impact
jb: interested in experience with VPATs, hearing different things
wd: got to test the product
anyway, VPAT can lie
... but availability of a VPAT is important, tells you
something about the product
<Andrew> AA: question about the accuracy, and hence value, of VPATs - my experience a few years ago was that they were very exagerated and/or had big gaps
jb: are people interested in resources being sent to the list?
wd: TEITAC site is pretty good, got lost on the Japanese one
<Andrew> JB: web and software subcommittee WIKI - http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software
<Andrew> JB: general interface - http://teitac.org/wiki/General_Interface_Accessibility
<Andrew> JB: audio - video subcommittee: http://teitac.org/wiki/Audio_Video
jw: what is the interaction between the sub-committees and the central one? how do they work together?
jb: sub-committess explore
specific areas using their own teleconferences and face-to-face
meetings
... for example to focus on cognitive disabilities or
such
... each sub-committee delivers reports of their specific
areas
... these are collated in the main committee with consensus
building
<Zakim> hbj, you wanted to ask about effect/influence on work in EU?
<Andrew> SAZ: where is the report to be sent?
jb: report that includes the
recommendations from TEITAC then goes to the US access
board
... then is processed there and comes back as a draft for
public review
hbj: how will this work that comes out of TEITAC influence the work in Europe?
jb: they will follow closely and maybe adopt interesting concepts
<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to clarify difference between EU & EC
jb: the process is so complex and sophisticated
<judy> s/any maybe adopt interesting concepts/and maybe adopt interesting concepts to the extent that they like what they see, or not
<Andrew> saz: EC is sitting on TEITAC, but EU has member states that are independent
<Andrew> ... very complex and unpredictable
wd: is TEITAC taking the same approach to emerging technologies?
<Andrew> JB: some international participants are particularly interested in how TEITAC addresses the needs of people with cognitive disabilities - see http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_Cognitive_recommendations
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask about public involvement w/ link
slh: someone asked me, they joined a sub-committe but don't know where and how to comment
jb: can do a lot
automatically...register, and subscribe to the mailing
list
... much of the discussion takes place on the mailing list
<judy> ...and attend teleconferences
jb: teleconferences are used additionally to
<Andrew> JB: initially join a mailing list (eg http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software#Mailing_list) then participate in the discussion
wl: how are wikis used?
jb: mainly for meeting logistics
but also for discussion specific themes
... also report to the full committee may take place in the
wiki
wl: no wikipedia entry for TEITAC
jb: thought there was, may be under section 508, please suggest
jb: ISO/IEC international
designated standards body
... JTC is a joint committee between these two bodies
... SWG is a wokring group within that, to focus on
accessibility
... aim is to address harmonization of standards
internationally
... process is fairly formal under JTC-1 procedures
... possibilites for participation of disability organizations,
by teleconference etc
... work by creating a matrix of requirements and
technologies
... there has been some effort to provide this information as a
library of technologies for governments
... JTC is not recommending any specific guidelines or
technologies, they only provide information about them
<Andrew> JB: one outcome is "Accessibility Standards Inventory Version 2.0" available from http://jtc1access.org/documents/swga_docreg.htm
wl: is accessibility considered?
jb: some are, for example JSA
submitted an accessibility standard for writing accessibility
standards
... still pursuing normative references to WCAG
... can see change in awareness of people's interest and
awareness
jw: what is the relationship of accessibility and usability<
jb: can't generalize, in general there seems to be a raise of awareness to both of these
slh: how's the discussion on that going in TEITAC?
jb: some interest in usability
from the participants
... not really affecting the provisions but the presentation of
them
wd: JTC?
<Andrew> AA: Andrew understands TEITAC is linking with ISO 9241-20 (Accessibility guidelines for ICT equipment & services)
jb: (J)oint (T)echnical (C)ommittee
hbj: sat in during the last
meeting Brussels...spent two days listening to acronyms and
numbers
... apart from that its interesting and a good idea
... hope good things will come out from it
... for instance work on the biometrics
<Andrew> AA: additional deliverable is "User Needs Summary Version 1.0" also available from http://jtc1access.org/documents/swga_docreg.htm
hbj: trying to get the ministries
to be aware and interested in JTC-1 work
... not to participate but to turn to when looking for
standards
<Andrew> AA: Andrew notes that JTC1 has established SWG-A Ad Hoc 12 (JTC 1 Web Site Accessibility) and is calling for Additional Participants
<Wayne> Interesting reference -- http://www.jtc1access.org/documents/swga_docreg.htm
<Zakim> Andrew, you wanted to coment on the poor accessibility of much of the JTC1 site
aa: JTC-1 established an ad-hoc
12 on Web site accessibility, and are calling for
partcipation
... also the site is very poor with regards to
accessibility
saz: this has been raised many times, its on the to-do but nothing much has happened lately
jb: initially was an attempt to
merge WCAG 1.0 and Section 508
... resulted in participation of JSA in WCAG WG
... working together to find common grounds
... in the hope of harmonizing the two specs
hbj: seems also that the Japanese are very active in JTC-1
jb: yes, very committed to harmonize work internationally
<Andrew> saz: to summarise:
<Andrew> ... UWEM is based on WCAG 1.0 and prepared by three Eurpoean groups
<Andrew> ... a new version should appear in mid-year to reflect WCAG 2.0
<Andrew> ... part of WAB-Cluster work spun of a CEN Workshop on Certification
<Andrew> ... WAI commented and reported back to EO in mid 2006
<Andrew> ... CEN workshops just produce papers and recommendation - not standards
<Andrew> ... another CEN Workshop is on Documention and Print Accessibility
<Andrew> ... relationship to DAISY and similar standards
<Andrew> ... also the EU Manadate to implement stanadards relating to accesisbility
<Andrew> ... will be an overlap with WCAG/UAAG/ATAG
wl: are people aware of ATAG?
<Andrew> WL: what about the role of tools?
saz: yes, but need to continue to raise awareness and the relationship between the guidelines
<Andrew> JB: ATAG doesn't seem to get traction within the discussions
<Andrew> ... because, no matter the obvious rationalle, it doesn't seem to connect
<Andrew> ... or they are preoccupieed with other issues
<Andrew> HBJ: went to a user group meeting for a CMS - they were talking about accessibility
<Andrew> ... talking to the developers, they concentrate on WCAG and output, not so much on the authoring end
<Andrew> WD: how is this going to get into law?
<Andrew> SAZ: EC is working on several fronts
<Andrew> ... harmonised technical standards
<shawn> ... harmonise how evaluation handled among member states
<shawn> ... if implemented at EC level, will filter down
<Andrew> HBJ: is Wayne asking about member state laws?
<Andrew> WD: yes - in US, just one law (S508), but in Europe, many member states
<Andrew> HBJ: in Denmark, mauch of this would not become law
<Andrew> ... often just policy & regulations
<Andrew> ... and often customised/interpreted
<Andrew> ... due to differences in culture
<Andrew> ... north/south & east/west differences
<Andrew> JB: good to be reminded of the very diverse cultural and legislative differences across Europe
<Andrew> ... and that EC can only recommend, not enforce
<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to be a bit more positive
<Andrew> ... also, economic differences; how much accessibility various countries think they can afford
<Andrew> SAZ: despite all these complexities, it is working and a lot of things are happening as a result of EC pushes
<Andrew> WD: in Denmark, you just have guidelines - if you follow, then you are "good"
<Andrew> ... do Corporations take any notice?
<Andrew> HBJ: they would like to be better, but impact is low
<Andrew> ... slow progress
<Andrew> SAZ: industry often doesn't take note of guidleines
<Andrew> ... but governments do
<Andrew> ... and often watch their neighbours
<Andrew> SLH: often works better in Europe than it would in the US
<Andrew> HBJ: in Denamrk, legislation would probably not have made any difference
jb: Henny was asking if this is
the same as the G3ICT
... first step towards ratification
<hbj> +q ask about meetings before we quit
jb: kicked-off activity to drive
implementation
... has a combination of government and non-government
participation
... question is how to try making information technologies
accessible
... most of te focus is on implementation, but also an eye on
standards
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask for links
slh: had a hard time finding links and information on this
jb: will put link to press release into IRC
<judy> more info: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2006/note6054.doc.htm
<Zakim> Andrew, you wanted to ask for references - is it related to http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2006/note6054.doc.htm?
jb: there are several versions of this
<scribe> ACTION: JB to dig up UN references and send to the list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/02-eo-minutes.html#action01]
<judy> Link to Tim's presentation in US congressional subcommittee: http://energycommerce.house.gov/cmte_mtgs/110-ti_hrg.030107.WorldWideWeb.shtml
hbj: having first meeting in
march
... hope to be driving implementation in DK
... want to use BAD and WCAG 2.0
<Andrew> one report: http://www.itworld.com/Man/2681/070301bernerslee/index.html
slh: testimony is online, reports, and webcast available
<Andrew> TBL Testimony: http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2007/03/01-ushouse-future-of-the-web.html
slh: next two meetings are planned, can check mid-week for confirmation
hbj: when are you planning the next f2f?
jb: no plans currently, see minutes of previous meeting
hbj: wondering if we want to continue these interesting discussion next week
saz: on Wednesday morning at CSUN there is a session Higher Education about California State University Accessibility Initiative
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128 of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/jb: what is the interaction/jw: what is the interaction/ FAILED: s/any maybe adopt interesting concepts/any maybe adopt interesting concepts to the extent that they like what they see, or not/ Succeeded: s/any/and/ Succeeded: s/withcognitive/with cognitive/ Succeeded: s/G2ICT/G3ICT/ Found Scribe: Shadi Inferring ScribeNick: shadi Default Present: doyle, Shawn, Wayne_Dick, Shadi, Bingham, Jack, Andrew_Arch, Judy, Sylvie_Duchateau\Tanguy_Lohéac, Helle_Bjarno, Loughborough, Justin, +1.509.773.aaaa, William Present: doyle Shawn Wayne_Dick Shadi Bingham Jack Andrew_Arch Judy Sylvie_Duchateau\Tanguy_Lohéac Helle_Bjarno Loughborough Justin +1.509.773.aaaa William Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007JanMar/0058.html Got date from IRC log name: 2 Mar 2007 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/03/02-eo-minutes.html People with action items: jb[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]