Daniel walked EO through the changes he made to the Curriculum based on received comments. On the question of replacing "Prerequisites" with "Competencies," there are mixed feelings. A few folks would prefer simpler language which will be considered, specific suggestions welcome. As well, consideration is being given to how learning outcomes will be referenced. EO should be alert to surveys that will be regularly presented to collect all feedback as the resource development progresses. Next Shawn reviewed changes to the images on the media narrative and the media checklists. Among the comments about placement and meaning was the suggestion to revisit the icon for planning that was previously developed and is in use in the planning guide. Comments were received, noted, and will processed next week. Please watch for revisions and prepare for final, thorough review. On the question of linking to outside resources, there is general acceptance of the need based on current bandwidth for developing detailed instructions. Points made include the need to balance the reality of the current media landscape against WAI's dedication to a neutral, diverse web, and mindfulness of maintenance issues. On the question of the new section on understanding user needs, consensus was that it is an important, useful section. Suggestions were made to link to existing user stories, to consider the 'busyness' of the paragraph, and to be sure we are confident in the placement of the paragraph at the beginning. EO participants were encouraged to revisit the Review Stages and Levels to be prepared for the next rounds of review of the curriculum and media resources. The meeting wrapped up with a schedule review and a reminder to stay in touch with Work for This Week. Thanks, all.
Daniel: Suggest to change title
of 'Prerequesite' to "Competencies'. It was a suggestion to be
more aligned with formal educational terminology. Any questions
or discussion about that change?
... very open to your input aboout this?
Eric: Only that both prerequisite and competency. both are quite complex words. May want to look for a shorter, simpler word.
<hdv> +1 to Eric's comment on that prerequisite and competency are quite complex words, if we can find shorter/easier ones that would be great
Daniel: I can note that and I agree. Maybe needs or skills would be better. If you have suggestions, please do put those in GitHub and we will continue to consider.
<dmontalvo> https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/issues/15
Shawn: I am used to prerequisite. Do not object to Competency
<shawn> [ There is an open GitHub issue for comment on this: https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/issues/15]
Daniel: Competency is more commonly used in formal education.
Howard: It is good to use terminolgy that is more formal if you want to engage with faculty, that is helpful.
Daniel: We have had discussion of the verbs - I have polished it a bit. There is a proposal for approaching this. One is with an introducory paragraph and the other is with bullets. Infinitive or the '-ing' form.
<shawn> Sharron: not like the -ing form. seems awkward
Sharron: I don't like the ing form, it seems quite awkward to me. It should be 'understanding OF..."
<yatil> -1 to -ing form, it feels unnecessary complicated
Shadi: Do you plan to have the sentence "Learners should be able to..." as a preface to the bullets?
<Vicki> Prefer option 1.
Daniel: Yes that is the
intent.
... and it seems there is greater preference for that
solution.
... so that is all from me for today. Coming up will be the
Unit 2 and 5, etc? thanks everyone.
... thanks for your input
Shawn: Will look at two specific
images and then move to the general
... for the rough concept draft images. Last week's feedback that planning was too
complex. Asking for reaction to current draft.
Laura: These are better, the puzzle without the rest reduces the busy-ness.
<yatil> +0 but wonder why we don't use our plan icon for planning... https://www.w3.org/WAI/planning-and-managing/plan/
Vicki: Yes this is in the right direction, really much better.
Eric: No strong preference, it makes sense to me.
Sharron: +1 to Eric's suggestion for consistency and continuity
<yatil> https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/content-images/wai-media-guide/av-content.png
Shawn: Next was the idea to use an actual video as the icon
Laura: No strong feeling
Lewis: If it were not where it is, it would have no meaning. It looks like a teacher, maybe belonging with the curricula
Eric: I agree, it is maybe necessary to have a completely different subject like a racing car with movement lines to indicate something different.
Vicki: For me too, it is confusing, it does not adequately convey the meaning.
KrisAnne: Even an old time movie symbol
Lewis: Or projector, but that may be too old fashioned that younger people would not understand it.
Shawn: What do we think about the fact that some of the icons are on the right, some on the left -thoughts on that?
<yatil> https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/design-develop/media/#how-to-make-audio-and-video-accessible
Laura: It seems fine to me, if it were the other way, it would be unbalanced.
KrisAnne: I like the way that the ones on the left are for general concepts and the ones on the right are specific. It works fine.
Howard: I like the mixture of text and icons, it reinforces the concpets. They are not distracting in the way they are placed.
Robert: I think there is maybe too much going on. resizing and zooming it, it feels like it needs more breathing room. From an info on page perspective, the icons don't break it up but only adds more to process.
Eric: I have not closely followed
the genesis and came without context. I found icons on the
left, icons on the right, my eyes are constantly adjusting and
it felt incoherant and I was distracted by why is this laid out
this way?
... while the concpets are different - general to specific -
they are not that much different and might be better to keep
all on the left.
<Zakim> hdv, you wanted to ask about icons on mobile
Shawn: The layout is somewhat 'hacked' and it would be more formally designed if we go with this concept.
Hidde: If we do this with the alternating left and right icons, is it something to include in the WAI web site style guide?
Shawn: We have that alternating in the Biz case so it should be in the style guide
Eric: But this is different, the BC ones are spaced by paragraphs, this is a list.
<yatil> [FTR: we already have a similar pattern in the tutorials: https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/tables/]
Shawn: The group suggested an icon for audio only, live vs pre-recorded
<yatil> Link: https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/design-develop/media/planning/#checklists
Shawn: we looked last week at two icons before the text, and got negative feedback - so have introduced another option: single icon in the heading and single icon in the box
<Vicki> +1 for icons there
Shawn: Where do people stand on the option of including icons at all
<Lewis> +1
<Howard> +1
<krisannekinney> +1
Robert: The can be helpful for many, so I am fine with icons
Shawn: So looking at this option,
there are icons for each section and each subsection
... so looking at the icons themselves?
<Vicki> +1
Laura: This is an improvement, much better to have them separate than having two icons together.
Shawn: I will come back with improved design on these or possibley others to consider.
<shawn> https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/design-develop/media/av-content/#video
Shawn: two eye candy images
Laura: The execution with the forward slash is not good. It looks like someone just slapped them in without thinking it through. The second one on options looks like mountains to me, not sure waht this is.
<Howard> neat idea of the mountain is cool. Agree with Eric.
Vicki: The first one is fine with me but I agree with Laura that it is confusing. It seems like mountains only.
Eric: It may be improved with
animation. An image transformed into something
... I like the idea of the second one but needs improvement in
execution. The first one is problematic.
KrisAnne: Agree with Eric that I like the idea of it turning into sound waves but as it is, it does not convey that. The video icon is not as strong as it should be. I wonder if there is another way to do this. It does not add anything, it does not connect to anything but adds confusion.
Shawn: They were meant to be a break up of text, no real purpose otherwise, will probably drop them.
Laura: The bulleted list with icons - not sure it works.
Shawn: Yes it may be too much
Laura: It is not conssitent and may not work along with the bullets
<shawn> https://github.com/w3c/wai-media-guide/issues/30
Shawn: Background is that we are
cautious about external links so that we don't show preference
and we avoid the need to keep up with active links, etc. Tried
to juggle between providiing guidance within this resource and
what to link to.
... Began with the idea to include the important stuff here and
minimize external link but I have evolved my thinking about
this. Any questions about the overall ideas around external
links?
... so then, looking at the GitHUb issue 1.1 in section tips
for writing descriptions
... these links came from the original version of this resource
from a couple of years ago. Comments on level of guidance we
provide and external links?
Laura: In this case, I think it works becasue it referenced the Dept of Education, not a commercial ntity. It is clear information, clearly presented.
ShadI: Two links to the same organization. I have not studied in detail but is there somewhere to put criteria so that if we get requests for "why not link to mine, it is so much better"
<rjolly> +1 to Shadi's suggestion of stating why/criteria for linking to these particular outside resources (at least for the short term)
ShadI: there are good resources externally but the maintenence issues are high and whatever the criteria, someone will petition that they meet them and should be linked to.
Robert: I know that we don't typically link out so why are we doing it now. Because it is so good and it is easier...or why?
Shawn: Each has a slightly different purpose. In this case, we give three bullets points with key concepts but this site has tons and tons more. I think some of our readers will want this level of info.
Shadi: I need to be pedantic. I am not sure who you are referring to without this expertise. I think we do have the internal expertise but maybe not the bandwidth or need to re-invent the wheel.
Sharron: Understood and no offense is meant. EO does different work than those who develop standards and guidelines. We are all volunteers but the products are quite dofferent. I am only saying that companies or government agencies that have this expertise tend to have fully dedicated people who are doing only this development of tutorials and support documentation. WAI does not have that.
Eric: It seems that the external linking is a bit unbalanced in this case.
Shawn: Yes, I understand, look at
1.2 Sign Language. An example of the opposite. In some places
we have extensive detail on how to do it. In others, we have
very little guidance and we link elsewher.
... it is due to our consideration of who is our audience, and
scoping decisions. If we had greater resource, we may have been
able to write our own guidance. But given the audience we
expect, we choose when and how to do internal guidance and when
to link out.
<shadi> +1 to Eric
Eric: Some people might get the feeling that we find audio description to be more important since we write more about it.
Shawn: Thoughts on this and the level of information on this page and the links out?
<shawn> 1.3 in github issue https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/design-develop/media/transcribing/#how-to-transcribe
Shawn: then one more to review
1.3 in the GitHub - How to Transcribe. Same question - what do
you think of the level of information on this page and the
links out?
... Robert you were asking about why and this is an example of
one where we link out partly due to the fact that there is
information here (such as funding and tools) that WAI would not
typically inclue.
Shadi: I am still thinking about
Eric point that as we provide more detail it may seem that we
favor one topic over another, giving it more importance just by
default.
... could we add more to the sections where we link out?
... there may be concerns from stakeholders that their issues
are not as adequately addressed.
Laura: The only concern I have with this particular resource is the outdated references to 508 and WCAG2.0 that can put the credibility at risk.
Shawn: Will get that updated,
thanks.
... Considering the links to YouTube and AblePLayer, YouTube is
working on expanding their accessiiblity expertise and
competency. A scenario is a podcaster, small shop that know
nothing about this. The idea is the many of the DIY will be
using YouTube. It is the fine line between recognizing the
reality and maintaining neutrality.
<shawn> Sharron: recognizing the reality vs. need to remain vendor neutral
Shawn: Most of our readers who use an external platform will use YouTube. Being super practical, we will provide the links and guidance to do that accessiiblity. Is there another vendor, competito to YouTube who might say "add my info too"
Laura: My concern is not really about a competitor it is that if we internally provide the instructions on how to, it is a constantly changing environment.
Eric: It is not a good sign to have links to a monopoly, it does not add to the diversity of the web that we are meant to be advocating for. The captioning instructions are easy to find, we may nt need to provide a link.
Shawn: If you look at the GitHub issues, 1.1 and 1.2 have the links. And I agree with your point.
<shawn> "There are tools that use speech recognition technology to turn a soundtrack into a timed caption file. For example, many videos uploaded to YouTube have automatic captions."
Shawn: online video platforms...thngs like YouTube....what else?
Eric: More people who visit our site know that they will have to have captions. No need to mention the branded service that provides auto captioning, only that it is a common proactice and how to edit and sync.
Hidde: Does it make it better to add at least three of them by name and to add the real world perspective?
Shadi: I do think, despite my support of the diversity issue, that many people are unaware that they can create auto captions. I mostly agree with Eric but disagree on "widely known feature." So naming the platforms and making it more real world is useful.
Shawn: If we remove the links, is it OK to name names?
Sharron: Yes and three would be a good target
<hdv> youku.com is another Chinese one
Shawn: Next to look at is media
players 2.3
... Brent and others asked for more specifc information about
how to choose and implement media players. Background is - I asked
Eric about how he would guide developers and he said "follow
AblePlayer implementation guide"
... so the approach is meant to be very practical.
... there are three links in the section, one is to the
AblePlayer set up desk.
<inserted> Daniel: I would keep these links but probably mention that there might be other alternatives
<yatil> +1 to dmontalvo
<Vicki> +1 to daniel
Shawn: OK then, moving on. 3.2 is a question about linking to the comparison table and that may have enticed Shadi to create an updated version but probably not for this version.
<shawn> https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/design-develop/media/#understanding-user-needs
Shawn: It is a new section on the first page. Thoughts?
<Vicki> +1 to the new section
Hidde: I think it is really good. I like it and like the placement.
KrisAnne: I like the idea of it. Two comments - the italics distract me. The other comment is do we have exisiting user stories that overlap, should we use them to expand on the ideas?
Shawn: Yes, a hard of hearing person and more. Great question, I am so glad you mentioned it.
Eric: I am a bit concerned about information density. We have bold, we have italics and if we add links to user stories it could overwhelm pretty quickly. Just want to be mindful of that.
Shawn: Yes it is great to lead
with the users, understand them first and so I like having it
first. On the other hand, it is a lot of info leading into what
people are often there for. Before we even define captions,
transcripts, audio descriptions.
... leaning toward leaving it at the first but wnat to hear
from you.
... any other comments for discussion on Media resource for
now?
Daniel: I want to mention the need to understand the connection of a braille display and mention that a screen reader is needed as a connection. If anyone had any other comments on this issue?
Shawn: I saw that comment in
queue and will be getting to it soon.
... want to talk a bit about the media player
<shawn> media player question
<shawn> https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/design-develop/media/#how-to-make-audio-and-video-accessible
<shawn> https://wai-media-guide.netlify.com/design-develop/media/planning/#checklists
Shawn: if you remember an earlier version the icon was on the left and Shadi said it did not really work since the style is different from the others. With that in mind, go to Checklist section
<yatil> [-.5 to single out the media player]
Shawn: It previoulsy kind of looked like this and the media player was at the end. KrisAnne suggested it belonged at the beginning. Am now thinking that both the player and the content checklist at the top in a subsection, since they are different from the others.
Laura: I can see why you would do that because it would be consistent to the narrative.It could separate player and content which are different from development part. I think it could work.
Sharron: +1
Shadi: I agree with Laura. The story you build on the inro to the media pages would be consistent with this check list.
KrisAnne: I like having it by itself, separated. It is related but different. It had been lost but moving it up and separating it adds clarity.
<rjolly> +1!
<krisannekinney> +1
<shawn> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Participation_Info#Review_Stages_and_Levels
Shawn: In case you ahve not seen for a while, the resources we are working on now will be going through these stages. Wanted to point to the guidance we have provided. For the curricula and the media resources, we have been going through drafts. It is useful to get wordsmithing etc on the complete drafts and not in the Thorough Review which is meant to provide the formal acceptance of the work.
Daniel: Regarding the surveys, we have worked to stagger the survey.
Shawn: You can expect to see a survey on different units steadily going forward. Thanks everyone, have a great weekend.
