Shawn began the meeting by acknowledging the new participants and said we would do full introductions when Judy and Brent joined later in the meeting. Eric reveiwed the updates he had made from comments on the Menu and Page Structure Tutorials and announced that the Approval to Publish would post this week. Robert gave a quick update on the Policies work that he has done with MaryJo and Andrew. They have addressed comments on prototype and next steps are to add inofmration to country-specific pages, implement filters in the summary table, and develop and wire up the submission form. Next Shadi thanked everyone for comments about How People with Disabilities Use the Web and the group agreed to:
<yatil> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/tutorials-review-april-2017/
Eric: Shadi and I have gone through, addressed comments, there are diff marked versions so that you can see what was done. The survey intros the questions and asks for approval to finalize
... and publish. We are hoping to have only small changes and be able to publish very soon. Norah and KrisAnne are helping with editing, wordsmithing and we are appreciative of their help which will be done in parallel to group review.
... that is basically the update I have, we are asking for your final review and approval let us know if there are any show stoppers. The survey is open until Apr 11 to allow plenty of time for review.
Shawn: Reminder that when you take the survey, we encourage all comments and also want to make the processing of those efficient. To support that we have lables for the comment level - must change, editor's discretion, or hang on suggestion to for a future version.
... since this is an Approval to Publish, it is open for a longer time but as always, the sooner you can get to it the better for those who are processing comments.
<rjolly> Policies Prototype
Shawn:MaryJo attended the planning meeting and let us know that they have addressed open comments on prototype in GitHub Issues and 20 March survey (and other GitHub issues?), and next steps are to add all information to country specific pages, get filters to work on table, and develop submission form.
Robert: Thanks Eric for updating the CSS so there has been some style applied.
... you can see the most recent updates. Have condensed the lead in verbiage making the section more condensed. Top of the page may still be too wordy, would like input on that to further reduce the weight of the intro
<rjolly> https://github.com/w3c/wai-policies-prototype/issues/1
Robert: MaryJo has continued to add countries, there are a few more items on her list, she has been closing resolved issues. The intro is no longer collapsible and the issue is closed. If this remains a concern for anyone, feel free to reopen that issue.
... Eric and I have discussed how to wire up the entry form and the filters so that those will be working soon. I will confer with MaryJo and Andrew about the timeline for these changes and expect it will not be too much longer.
Shawn: If you can join the planning call next Thursday to get in sync for the meeting next week, that will be great. This is on GitHub as Robert said, so feel free to comment any time. We are updating interface, creating a submission form, and will ask those who have volunteered to help update, the publish that ask community for updated content. Thanks to MJ, Robert, Andrew and all who commented.
Shadi: Thanks for the comments, especially for using GitHub which makes it very easy to process. I have closed issues as they were addressed and you have recived the notice. I sent email to those who commented on the survey and have a few unresolved questions for the group today.
<shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/PWD-use-Web/
Shadi: as we go along, I will include the survey link
<shadi> https://w3c.github.io/wai-people-use-web/Overview.html
Shadi: first issue is the question of the links at the bottom, one pointed to videos, one to Better Web browsing, link to Personas, and Using WAI materials. Issue was how they took people away for the WAI website without prep. Suggestions to build internal personas using Creative Commons license. So I simplified the section at the bottom, now only 2 links there. One to the videos and one to Better Web Browsing. That was how I processed that issue, has it addressed your concerns?
Laura: Shadi, yes this is great, exactly what I was hoping for. Simplified and pointing to our own resources.
Shawn: So we are not pointing to the external videos at all?
Shadi: Yes I think those external videos were outdated in any case.
Shawn: yes this looks fine to me...and the Creative Commons license might need additional thought
<rjolly> +1 to making everything CC licensed per Shadi's suggestion
<yatil> +1 to CC!
<krisannekinney> +1 to CC
Shadi: Shawn, can you take it from here and resolve it?
Shawn: Yes I can do that.
<Norah> +1 CC license
Shadi: Next is the issue of how mobile is included. In the review I did make some improvements, tried to build in more use of mobile, I am getting conflicting suggestions. Mobile was pulled from Ms Kaseem. But Sharron said that all people are using mobile more every day and should be mentioned. But when mentioned I think it should be expanded that would add quite a bit more text.
Sharron:Remember Shadi, this was a medium suggestion and left for editor's discretion. Don't feel super strongly. Only that the questions was phrased as "how realistic" are the profiles. Realistically, everyone uses mobile. But if you prefer less realistic in service to brevity that makes sense to me as well.
...don't necessarily think that if it is mentipned it must be expanded upon.
<shawn> existing stories: https://w3c.github.io/wai-people-use-web/stories.html
Shadi: Because it is not mentioned does not mean they are not using mobile. The group should decide if they feel that it must be mentioned to be realistic. Take Mr. Jones, if we add his mobile use, we would have to relate to how mobile use effects his RSI.
Shawn: One of the questions is if mobile is not mentioned does it mean that we are saying he is NOT using mobile?
<Norah> could you possibly add one sentence mention that Mr. Jones also uses voice for text messaging and search on his mobile phone?
Shawn: understand that readers will assume that the profiles are in fact using mobile.
<Howard> +1
Sharron: Seems like we could mention mobile without expounding on it too much, without adding a lot extraneously.
<yatil> [I think we can push that to another iteration, it looks like nobody feels strongly, so we might not need to address that immediately.]
<shawn> [ Shawn leaning towards the suggestion to sprinkle in mobile without explaining much now. and considering expanding more later as warranted ]
Howard: I think it is fine as it is, no need to expand and mention mobile in every case. If it flows naturally within the profile, then expand on it. Since we expand on the technology most related to the disability, it is fine as it is.
Shawn: Sounds like Editor's discretion.
Eric: It sounds like it is something that is good to reflect on but not significant enough to hold up publication, can come back to at a future time. I am comfortable publishing as is.
Norah: When is the next iteration?
Shawn: No specific schedule and realistically, it could be a year or more.
Norah: Maybe adding a sentence that the reporter also uses speech input for mobile to send text, etc
Shadi: So if you look at the thread there are similar suggestions from Sharron as well.
<shadi> https://github.com/w3c/wai-people-use-web/issues/20#issuecomment-289582405
Sarah: If we are looking at potentially a year for revisions I think adding more mobile and especially since many people are not aware that blind people can use touch on mobile and voice etc.
Shadi: here are some suggestions in GitHUb, is along the lines of what you all are thinking?
Sarah: : Yes, that seems sufficient for now
Norah: I think so, and another thought is that adding mobile can possibly add the aspect of universal design for people to consider.
<shawn> +1 for adding that bit from Norah for RSI
Norah: it is a mainstream tool, built into mobile.
Shadi: That is my discomfort, that being a mainstream tool may diminish the impact for PWD.
Shawn: Maybe we can say adding mobile is not enough to be a show stopper and publish as is but make it a priority for the next iteration and accelerate the time line.
Shadi: Howard, do you have concerns with adding it?
<shawn> ... for doing that interim addition, even before we reorg the whole thing
Howard: No now that I see the suggestions, it is a nice touch. I am fine as long as it flows naturally and does not feel forced.
Shadi: It seems the group is leaning toward more mobile and I hear as an editor that there is more support for adding it along the lines of your suggestions.
... There was a comment about the addition of "age-related disability" and I am struggling with finding another phrase or revise the wording.
<Norah> I think it is important to keep the age-related disability wording
<Brent> Clarification, not remove sentence, remove phrase in the sentence.
Shadi: we spend a lot of effort in outreach to organizations that serve older people and try to make the connection to how WCAG helps meet those needs.
<Sarah> +1
<yatil> +.55 to keep - Don't think it hurts.
Judy: When we were specifically working on age-related disability we spent considerable time looking for ways to address and felt that despite clunky wording the concept was important. We made a commitment to keep that focus moving forward. I would suggest to leave it and not sweat the wording.
<Laura> +1
Norah: I agree
<Brent> Shadi, I am fine going with group consensus.
<rjolly> keep wording is fine with me
<krisannekinney> I don't think it hurts to keep it
<krisannekinney> can you drop the link in here?
Shadi: Great thanks. Finally on the Principles page there are many links out to Guidelines.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/people-use-web/principles
Shadi: Screen reader user says it is a bit noisy, too many links.
<Laura> agree with you Shadi
<rjolly> suggestion: Could we put (technical report) next to the header and remove the icons?
<shawn> Link to overview page: https://w3c.github.io/wai-people-use-web/Overview
Eric: I think it is all W3C content, don't feel strongly that it needs to be emphasized.
Shadi: My concern is that some links go to the same format and some to different ones. Robert's suggestion is worth considering.
<rjolly> Clarification: Suggest we use the word(s) instead of icon next to heading
Eric: It doesn't really say anything to a person who is not familiar with W3C lingo.
<rjolly> +1 to @yatil not using "technical report" but something more appropriate
<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say tweak "Accessibility requirements related to text alternatives" to clarify then only need it once instead of 3 times
Shadi: Eric, I am hearing that you have no objection to the words rather than an icon?
Eric: Sure
Shawn: We would still have it three times in the section unless we can smoothly work it into heading.
Shadi: Thanks everyone. Finally there was an issue in Diversity in Web Use. First part talks about perception and asked why sign language was not there.I adjusted the sentence to make that more clear. hoping the clarify that we are talking about different sense rather than different presentation.
Brent: Yes it clarifies
Shadi: That closes my outstanding issues, will update with this info, Howard working on updating links and then will be ready for publication.
Brent: We reached out to COGA and they will meet on the Diversity of Web users pages, the cognitive and learning section and will review and provide their edits on Monday.
... will send to you or to me.
Shadi: Can you ask them to put it on the GitHUb?
Brent: I did that and if they don't I will do that.
... I told them we only wanted things that were not accurate or were outdated. I told them that if they wanted more detail of certain issues, those would be reserved for another version.
Shawn: If they can suggest specific wording that will be good as well.
... Anything else? Thanks for comments, thank you Shadi. Another housekeeping note, remember to speak your comments as well as putting them in IRC since not everyone is on or watches that.
... and new participants please feel free to ask any question at any time. They will be positively received.
... now that everyone is here, let's do a round of introductions.
All: Brief introductions, who you are, how long with EO, where you work, live, etc.
...welcome Norah, Sarah!
Brent: A few weeks ago, Judy brought to our attention an opportunity to weigh in on new projects taking shape. We had a survey last week about the requirements for these and will follow up today.Judy?
<Judy> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/EO-Weekly-24-Mar-2017/results
Judy: Thanks Brent, There are a few more links for people to see and the background is that there are several resources to be developed in parallel. Thanks to those who have commented, the survey is open through 4 April. There were outlines for group consideration on these resources. In today's call I wanted to give a status update and raise a few questions that have come up from current feedback.
... in terms of the survey, there were one or two broken links initially. if you were affected, please try again.
... This is the kind of feedback I was hoping for have been making adjustment based on issues raised. I have questions that I placed in the planning agenda.
Brent: I moved it into the meeting agenda
<Judy> https://github.com/w3c/wai-tutorials/issues/471
Judy: Proposed tutorials were drawn from conversations and the EO wish list. Two are more of a conceptual style and may not be enough like the existing tutorials to share the name. An idea has been suggested to be more of "Guides" to be housed within the tutorial library. Wanted to know what people thought.
... a concern is that this would be a differently named and differently focused resource than EO has managed in the past. For example, the ARIA Authoring Guide is huge, is there a way to present something like a Guide and stay in scope?
<Judy> https://github.com/w3c/wai-tutorials/issues/471
Brent: Are people familiar with the comment, with the issue?
Judy: Many developers ask us "Do you have a tutorial on mobile?" Since the answer is that resources are spread around, the idea would be to bring people in and help them understand how to find and use what is already provided in support of accessible mobile development.
Eric: I have some concerns about how well the existing tutorial format aligns with the scope and purpose of these proposed new ones. We have mobile guidance covered in several of the current tutorials. I am not opposed at all to having a mobile resource but really wonder if the tutorial format is the right one.
Sarah: It does seem that these resources are different level of granularity than the exisitng tutorials. A difference in the way they are presented will be important. It is worthwhile to consider how to better separate the type of resources through information architecture.
Judy: Do you imagine things that wuld be signals in the structual format?
KrisAnne: You said people ask about where are mobile resources and my fear is the potential for giving conflicting information if we send them to various places.
... if there is a lot already in place, we may need to just create a mobile landing page, we have mobile in the existing tutorials and need to be careful about separating mobile out and possibly creating confusion and even conflicting guidance.
<shawn> current mobile landing page
Judy: I should clarify about the difference between what is "out" in WAI space and in the wider community. WAI actually does have a landing page for mobile and the approach is one to list and describe existing resources.
... it is a narrative approach. I anticipate significant updates to the landing page but have heard from developers that they expect more of a technical walk through of technical support materials which may be coming from the Mobile TF. There is a challenge in staying in sync with that and work happening in the field.I hear your concern about conflict and will make note of it but think it can be managed.
Shadi: I am not a developer but find there is a need for a developer "walk-through" that explains from a technical perspective how the standards and requirements are applied to this space. I share Eric's concerns about keeping at such a high level that it would not be useful. Has the Mobile TF weighted in?
Judy: That is my next step. Have spoken with the co-facilitators and will continue the discussion on Monday. If we can mock something up it may be useful.
Shadi: Yes that will help our ability to assess the approach.
Judy: We started quiet on this topic and have gotten good comments wanted to get back to Sarah for her thoughts on structure.
<Judy> https://github.com/w3c/wai-tutorials/issues/477
Sarah: (can't hear comment)...soemthing about groundwook and cross-over. Elevate
... as defined, these seem like meta-topics that would come before a "tutorial," a precursor.
Norah: I like the idea of identifying the resource as a "Guide" rather than a tutorial which we would expect to be more of a step by step.
<Judy> https://github.com/w3c/wai-tutorials/issues/477 Datepickers...
Judy: Next question is simpler, the date-picker is conceived to be a draw into the UI component library which is still in development
... if we did just ARIA datepickers it would be directly duplicative of the work in the ARIA authoring guide. Eric said there were other options and we may be able to do some bridging work there.
Shadi: I feel pretty strongly that we should not build anything that has dependency on the UI Components list.
... and want to agree that a tutorial is step by step, how to. If date-picker is already being done, choose another. The wish list came from conversations with people doing evaluations and was a combination of different perspectives.
<Judy> https://github.com/w3c/wai-tutorials/issues/478
Judy: The other question is the captioning tutorial and is related to the BAD demo curriculum. There were comments about broadening the captioning topic to include media in a more general way. Questions or comments on that welcome.
<Sarah> +1 to including broader media
<Brent> +1 to that idea from me as well.
Judy: also good reactions on the curriculum usage of BAD. Enthusiasm for that and would love to find time to interview you on how you use this, Howard and anyone else who uses it.
<Judy> https://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/
<yatil> +1 to make a video tutorial, including captions
Judy: and remember the survey remains open.
<Brent> If you currently use BAD for training or education, please let Judy know so that she can connect with you for more detail <jbrewer@w3.org>
Judy: next steps, an outline coming and a mockup or two. KrisAnne you mentioned a GitHub comment that I am not sure I found.
Brent: Thanks Judy and keep in mind that it was last week's survey and remains open until the 4th. Even if you have commented you can reopen the survey and add comments as you process what we said today.
Brent: Tutorial approval to publish survey, expect it to be cursory, survey will walk you through it. Closes on the 11th of April. Weekly survey may not have much this week, may be some policy questions. or a reminder email to read minutes.
<Sarah> Bye!
Sharron: Face to face will be Friday and Saturday, May 19th and 20th in Austin.
<krisannekinney> bye
Brent: will follow up with that and thanks all.