Dear participant,

Please find below the calling details for the Online Symposium on 
Website Accessibility Metrics. The event will be held on Monday 5 
December 2011 at 15‑17 UTC; see the times in different locations:
  ‑ <http://bit.ly/tPDcnq>

You can dial the teleconference bridge using any phone, including 
internet phones and services such as Skype. The number to call is:

+1.617.716.6200

You can also make free calls using VoIP/SIP clients. Configuration 
information is provided here, and more help is available online:
  ‑ <http://www.w3.org/2006/tools/wiki/Zakim‑SIP>

After the recorded message, enter the 

conference code: 7394 followed by 
the "#" key on your dialpad. Once the conference code is accepted, you 
then need to enter your personal identification code, followed by the 
"#" key again. Your 

personal identification code: 4392359.

Your line will be automatically muted to reduce noise on the call. 
Instructions will be provided on how you can raise questions.

Please note that the symposium will start punctually at 15:00 UTC; phone 
lines will be open several minutes prior to the event.

Looking forward to your participation!

Regards,
   Shadi

‑‑ 
Shadi Abou‑Zahra ‑ http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)

Discussion:

17:35: Gorgio 
Q1: Who is the target user group of the presented matric and why should they use it (purpose)? 
Q2: How do you estimate the validity of your approach? 
Q3: Should a metrics measure something else beyound the conformance with some accessibility guidelines (user experience, estimated repair time, …)?

Maia: 1: Everyone who wants to test a site. 2: It is valid acc. our practical assessment. 

Silvia: 1: First target is a local government in Italy for monitoring sites; but everyone needing monitoring can use it. Its strictly based on Italian problematic. 

Luz: 1: All people wantig to validate the web content can use it. 2: Tight now they are working on validating this metric.

Detlev: 1. The testers and the web developers. 2: Validity is stated by double tests.  3: Crucial: Any metric result value needs also human evaluation.

Markel: 1: For context metrics: those who need to know if the accessibility for specific user group is met; for WAQUM: End users. 3: We have to take in account different user needs beyond the conformance.

Anika: 1: Site owners, web editors, web deigners, web developers. The purpose is to improve the accessiblity and to get an extended report. 2: trying to follow WCAG quite closely. 
To put the question diferently: from user point of you the credability is important. You have to find the best tool for your needs. 
3: Limitations of aconformance-bound metric: It is very hard to take in account the experience of a specific user.

David: 1: Organisations providing web sites; monitors who have the understandnig of technical issues and who can improve inclusivity; the bearer of decission making; developers for being able to prioritize the improvig process; 
Legal bodies. End users are the beneficiaries of the whole process. 
2: Definition of metric and getting inclusive evidence of applying the right measures – providing necessary services through the social provider organisations. 
3: All we discuss here is much over pure technical conforance. We have to measure how well an organisation succeed to offer its inclusive services.

Jorge Fernadez: 
1: Developers for site monitoring, for testing the initial statte of their sites; user organisations to control the iclusion; producing data for research. 
2: The list of WA reports made by experts was produced. They used different tools. The own results was confronted with these results.
About JavaScript: The tool has possibility to evaluate the dynamic code created by JavaScript.

18:00:
Public questions: 

Q: (Gunderson) How is it possible to apply a unified metric on solutions implemented through different WCAG Techniques? 
A: (Anika) You have to define a logical combination of techniques available. That will evolve and change so you need a constant update of your tool.
A: (Josh) Web changes to fast. We have to find ways to quantify user experience.

Q: Are there tools for evaluating dynamically generated content (JavaScript)?
A: (Josh) There are simple methods that should be built in as best practices. 

Q: (Harper) Do we need a collection of sample pages/sites to facilitate the comparison and the evaluation of different metrics?
A: (Markel) There is no way to compare the results of all the different metrics and applications. We should have a set of standard pages to be evaluated for the evaluation of current and new developed metrics. It would be important to show every time why people propose new metrics and what these metrics contribute.