RE: Important survey (COGA references)

Hi Lisa and All,

The survey is great.

I noticed these what-I-think-are direct or indirect references to our needs. I hope you find this list useful.


  *   Github has a complex interface, which is especially difficult for some COGA folk.
  *   Need to get a better mix of skills in Task Forces (and in future work in general), e.g. technical / standards-experienced people working with domain experts.
  *   Experts in task forces feeling they are not believed and/or that the wider group does not understand the issues;
  *   Strength of feeling has lead to misbehavior (perceived or actual), which contributes to a negative atmosphere.
  *   Some TFs need help with translating requirements to SC, earlier in the process;
  *   Include plain language versions of everything, or at least plain-language summaries.
  *   Possible proposals to support more understandability of work:
     *   WG works in plain language, somebody charged with translating to spec language
     *   Work on spec language, but with more emphasis on understandability, with explicit WG review step for that (try to avoid recycling due to concerns of over-simplification) - this could be a complementary mode to above that we continually cycle between
     *   We develop spec language, but when it matures somebody makes a plain language version.
     *   Develop spec in plain language - but may not be concrete enough.
  *   Focusing 2.2 on COGA
     *   Pro: Fills in gaps, allow focus without distraction from other areas.
     *   Con: If SC don't fit 2.x methods, will hinder adoption; disagreement over relative priority of the needs.

John

John Rochford<http://bit.ly/profile-rj>
University of Massachusetts Medical School
Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center
Director, INDEX Program
Faculty, Family Medicine & Community Health
www.DisabilityInfo.org
LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-rochford/>

Confidentiality Notice:
This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary, and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and destroy or permanently delete all copies of the original message.

From: lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2018 1:41 PM
To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Subject: Important survey

Olease look at the following wcag survey

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/process-results-pt1/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.w3.org_2002_09_wbs_35422_process-2Dresults-2Dpt1_&d=DwMFaQ&c=WJBj9sUF1mbpVIAf3biu3CPHX4MeRjY_w4DerPlOmhQ&r=CueeOhb9CA5L2yfl16hThwCe1zS5LdHYD5MikPNgKr4&m=AipLZ7NUrnXGHkcwcde0X2NpdhY5v57MtcI2DEMcg3w&s=d4CHQzXumIcj4vg0GnqAEQ8NotlF0EX2hN0Hh5Fg_tk&e=>

it is about how wcag want to change their processes  - hopefully to include us

Do we think this will do the job?

All the best

Lisa Seeman

LinkedIn<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__il.linkedin.com_in_lisaseeman_&d=DwMFaQ&c=WJBj9sUF1mbpVIAf3biu3CPHX4MeRjY_w4DerPlOmhQ&r=CueeOhb9CA5L2yfl16hThwCe1zS5LdHYD5MikPNgKr4&m=AipLZ7NUrnXGHkcwcde0X2NpdhY5v57MtcI2DEMcg3w&s=GfncpsOPibZGMvOYmfxIxEAxU05fonKyPxealARURpI&e=>, Twitter<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_SeemanLisa&d=DwMFaQ&c=WJBj9sUF1mbpVIAf3biu3CPHX4MeRjY_w4DerPlOmhQ&r=CueeOhb9CA5L2yfl16hThwCe1zS5LdHYD5MikPNgKr4&m=AipLZ7NUrnXGHkcwcde0X2NpdhY5v57MtcI2DEMcg3w&s=z4TB--ogcZM_WnoMNN8a9agxgEh-5A8L7KZvf8kG1A4&e=>