- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@paciellogroup.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 11:41:58 -0500
- To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Formatted minutes:
https://www.w3.org/2018/11/20-silver-minutes.html
Text of the minutes:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
Silver Community Group Teleconference
20 Nov 2018
Attendees
Present
LuisG, Cyborg, KimD, Makoto, jeanne, Shawn, Jennison,
Angela, MikeCrabb
Regrets
Chair
Shawn, jeanne
Scribe
LuisG
Contents
* [2]Topics
* [3]Summary of Action Items
* [4]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
Lauriat: We want to start building what we might use as a
conformance model. Taking existing SCs and things that didn't
get into 2.1 and building things out.
<jeanne>
[5]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aBoQ1HDindVnFk_7Ljp-whpK
3zAiqAdgJxsgpqsNpgU/edit
[5]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aBoQ1HDindVnFk_7Ljp-whpK3zAiqAdgJxsgpqsNpgU/edit
Jeanne: We have a starting point, the work that Cyborg, Luis,
and I did over the Summer
... it's a little old, but might still be a good place to begin
<jeanne> Heuristic evaluation to determine if the alternative
text explains the issue in the context given. This is a
task-based assessment, instead of a component-based assessment.
See Table 5 prototype for images of grading scale. The scale
ranges from “Can’t Use At All” through “With Difficulty” to
“Pretty Easy” to “The Best”. The example for “Finding a Hotel”
using an HTML
<jeanne> form, has tasks such as “Perceivable: Identifying the
form”, “Understanding: How to use the form”, “Operable: able to
complete the form” and “Robust: Code check for HTML
compliance”. The tester selects the persona of a person with a
disability that they want to check against, and tests using
that persona’s restrictions (for example, with mouse unplugged,
screen turned off,
<jeanne> etc. That needs to be determined in advance.) The
tester grades the experience on the scale. (part of a broader
test of more accessibility needs)
Jeanne: Maybe we could look at Example 2, the one starting with
"Heuristic evaluation..."
... We could start with the test rules: with the screen turned
off; using a screen reader
JF: I'm looking at this. I'm struggling with whether we have a
definition for "pretty easy?"
Jeanne: We're looking at that...how do we define that, etc.
JF: Putting aside "pretty easy," I'm concerned that the test
rules are focused on a screen reader. Would other rules be as
effective and have less overhead.
... For example, the Web Developer Toolbar will provide alt
text for every image, etc.
<Cyborg> just got here, so if there was a link pasted above
that we're discussing, could someone please repost? thanks
sure, one sec
[6]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aBoQ1HDindVnFk_7Ljp-whpK
3zAiqAdgJxsgpqsNpgU/edit
[6]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aBoQ1HDindVnFk_7Ljp-whpK3zAiqAdgJxsgpqsNpgU/edit
<Cyborg> thanks
JF: There are ways we can do this testing without a screen
reader. There might be a lighter-touch test we can do for the
same thing.
Lauriat: Maybe we could come back to this as a way of testing
it.
JF: The real test isn't exposing the text alternative, it's
whether the alt text is "pretty easy," "the best," etc.
<Makoto> +1 to JF
Jeanne: So how do we determine that the accessible name is
correct?
Lauriat: Let's start with "can someone complete the task with
the text alternative" instead of the visual presented in the
image.
<mikeCrabb> [7]https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/
[7] https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/
JF: If the image has text burned into the image, I also want to
see the image while I'm evaluating the alt text.
mikeCrabb: This has examples of what you would want to have in
the alt text
Jeanne: So, what should the scale be?
Lauriat: Right now, we have full page conformance...but for
task based conformance, we'd need to figure out how to piece
something together.
JF: Text alternatives can get a bit granular depending on how
the image is being used.
Lauriat: Why don't we start there...the first step for testing
the alt text is to determine the intention for the image.
JF: Well, the first step would be if there is a text
alternative. And then what is the purpose of the image.
<JF> Locate each image that can be activated as part of the
user interface. If the image is the only element within an
interface control, ensure that it has an appropriate short text
alternative that conveys the purpose of the control or presents
the same information as the image. If the control also contains
text content, ensure that one of the following is true: The
image has an appropriate short text alternative which, together
with the control's text content, convey
JF: from the beginning there are contextual decisions that need
to be made
Jeanne: We are envisioning these tests would be part of the
methods. I don't think we're trying to impose a method that's
required
JF: So there's the doing and there's the verifying. The doing
is wide open, the verifying is "you've picked one of the
methods" is it good?
... as an evaluator, I need to see what you've chosen to use
and does the value string make sense?
Jeanne: Can you see there being a scale for how well it works
on the page?
JF: That's why I was wondering what does "pretty easy" mean? I
can see it at a high level where a few people could do it,
because it comes down to each person's definition of "pretty
easy"
Lauriat: Maybe someone has a different definition for "pretty
easy" or "fantastic" but they'd both be success. What about
something like "complete failure" "with difficulty" and
"success"
... like the difference between "Submit" and "Send" for an
email
JF: If the alt text is being auto-generated...and they're all
"button" so they're useless
... at that point, is it a pass or a fail?
... and it would be a partial pass since it has a text
alternative, but the value is useless
Jeanne: That's what we're trying to do
Lauriat: Can the user complete the task based on the
alternative text
JF: There would be need to a similar decision tree that is a
if/else walkthrough
<Cyborg> To Luis and Jeanne - I added a comment re: the
prioritization to the document -- in line with our previous
discussions.
Lauriat: I think we should use the same scale for
everything...just keep what we have as a strawman and adjust it
as we work through things
<Cyborg> changing it from 3 point prioritization rather than 4
point - i thought we went through this
we hadn't reflected that change in this document
Jeanne: Maybe we should provide examples of what measurements
on that scale look like
Lauriat: Maybe some scales will work for some tasks, but not
others...that could help inform what we end up using
... Let's complete the walkthrough for how to do this for one
type of image
Jeanne: I want to give mikeCrabb a chance to talk
mikeCrabb: There were arguments about what the tags in the
Information Architecture prototype should be...and not whether
we should have tags, so that was good
<jeanne>
[8]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2018Nov/0
062.html <- Mark Tanner's email on tagging
[8]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2018Nov/0062.html
mikeCrabb: I'll be taking a closer look at it next week when I
have more time
Jeanne: We also got an alternative scoring proposal...I invited
him to join us for a meeting
<jeanne>
[9]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JXR20WYEYd3mZVRDTpQCMsU2
cHwlFPxTbsxQIVVxEwc/edit
[9]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JXR20WYEYd3mZVRDTpQCMsU2cHwlFPxTbsxQIVVxEwc/edit
Jeanne: I created a google doc for it
... if folks can look at it, we can continue with this next
week since we're not meeting on Friday
... and we got more responses from AGWG, if you could take a
look at that in the email
... anything new on Plain Language?
Cyborg: I'm more focused on conformance. I was listening to
y'all and adding stuff to the document
... separating task-based guidance from product-level guidance,
etc.
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2018 16:42:22 UTC