http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/responding/
AA: [reads comment from
Michael about 'large vs. small organisations']
... any comments or questions?
WL: some organizations have
disability coordinators or similar
... sometimes also legal or policy statements
... could refer to these and quote their own policy
... sometimes Web sites are no longer by organization
MS: very dependent on the
organizational culture as to what the best approach is
... often not apparent from their Web site
... not a matter of small or large organization
AA: can we provide guidance?
MS: don't know how to, can't give a general rule
AA: maybe just stating the issue
SAZ: maybe quote
some examples to say that diff organisations may have diff cultures and different
ways of handling feedback, e.g. disability officer, etc
... might give
people ideas
MS: examples would be very helpful for this document and the target audience
WL: "responding" means in response to something
AA: yes, came up but let's take that later
AA: tried to provide examples and
provide ideas
... have an issue marked, because was unsure about the need to
restate being constructive
WL: maybe a repetition but not wrong
SAZ: try changing
"must"
... repetition is ok, but the
"must" caught me
... feedback should be constructive and usable
... but organizations should also respond even if the feedback
is not constructive
JW: agree that constructive
comments are important
... people may be frustrated and unhappy
AA: need to address frustration and anger
MS: probably these people don't
read this document
... when i'm angry, i'd send an e-mail rather than read a
document
<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to address reactive vs constructive messaging
SAZ: in response to
MS, yes, but over time you may look for a way to address that
frustration and you may land on this doc (or a version or link to
it)
... that person may
now find guidance, and it may be necessary to keep them calm and
suggest constructive response
... a bit of both -
may be angry because of ongoing issues
... these people are
facing strong issues and may become good allies who may stay on
the problem to resolution
WL: maybe we could have good visibility of this document
AA: quotes sometimes increase findability
SAZ: separate issue -
but note that w3c has had good google findability
... people also get
info from local communities
... forms another
channel for distributing our info (with credit we hope)
... maybe in a
different format as part of a print publication
AA: back again to some of the
examples
... leaning towards taking out listing the types of
disabilities
... the examples are self-explaining from the context
WL: developer might wonder why someone doesn't use the mouse
MS: maybe say "can't" use a mouse rather than "don't"
AA: good suggestion
... any other important examples left out?
... don't want to be exclusive
MS: often key information such as
contact person or e-mail is in images
... could add something about text in images
... or unlabeled image buttons
WL: cognitive aspects important
for older people
... opacity of the Web site may also be useful
SAZ: agree with
William and Michael
... 2 relate to text
size, 2 relate to mouse use - condense and add more
diversity
... cognitive
aspects and reading level is good
... images of text
and related is also good
WL: readers also discover that they are not alone
AA: approach for examples OK for people?
WL: may be too geeky
SAZ: if you know
what browser, then tell the org - many people just know hwy are
using the internet, and not what browser they use
... e.g. if you know
which computer system you use, consider providing this to give
more information on your situation
JW: also "About XYZ" might be
challenging for some readers
... but don't have good suggestions
MS: this whole section may be too
long
... even longer than "what is the problem" section
... really hard to teach people what type of browser they are
using or such
... they may know the brand but often not the version
AA: might be follow-up?
JW: good suggestion
AA: will remove some of the technical details, and add something brief in the section on follow-up
AA: collected several suggestions in here for discussion
WL: Suzette had a good suggestion
AA: [reads suggestion from Suzette's e-mail]
WL: even organizations that are
required to be accessible may not respond
... even though there is often a process
AA: any suggestions inappropriate?
AA: considered copy & paste samples
WL: could include petitions
... could give it a try
SAZ: express small
concern about hypothetical sample emails and how usefully they
would be
.... people may get
tangled in the details
... more work on the
template may be better
... e.g. parentheses
and italics may not be sufficient
... more guidance
may be useful at the start, e.g. here is a template, but
encourage people to adapt
... encourage more
effort on template (rather than samples)
http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-responding.html
AA: title considerations under
the "changelog" section
... collected different suggestions here
SAZ: "Contacting Organizations with Inaccessible Web Sites"?
WL: +1
JW: +1
MS: like the "How To Contact..."
because we provide how-to information
... communicates the feeling of a helpful document
... as in "how to do it"
AA: a call to action
... maybe works good for a 2-part title
MS: sub-title is often not shown in the search engine results
No actions recorded
[End of minutes]