Lexicon stuff, Minutes and More!

Dear Lexicon Task Force,

To suggest the ATAG people to change some ATAG glossary descriptions we need to know what you as Lexicon Task Force member think of these descriptions. Only after considering your comments I can make a proposal for the EOWG members. Since many of us will have holidays ahead I would ask everybody to respond before Thursday night sending your comments on the last description proposal. !!See my mail from the 14th of December!! 

In case we will have a call on the 27th, I will make a new proposal for the Lexicon members before the call and finalize the descriptions soon after the 27th as a proposal for the EOWG.
I will ask Judy and Shawn to put this on the agenda of the 7th of January EOWG call.

About the availability for the teleconference the 27th of December I have a:
yes from Helle and Pasquale and a 
no from Harvey and Sylvie.

So I miss Carol, Libby, Natasha and Andrew (please send your availability about joining the 27th December call)

Below the minutes of 29 November call will follow. Thanks to Sylvie!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
EOWG Minutes 29 November 2004 Meeting
on this page: attendees - Strategy of work - What to do with normative documents like ATAG 20 - Analysis characters b-g - next meeting

Meeting Summary and Action Items
all: look at the ATAG glossary till end of the week; 
all: send selection for letters h-o for the deadline in two weeks. 

Agenda
agenda in e-mail list archives: Agenda for the 29 November teleconference and some more information for the teleconference

Attendees
CS: Carol Smith 
HBj: Helle Bjarnø 
HS: Henk Snetselaar 
LC: Libby Cohen 
SD: Sylvie Duchateau 
SLH: Shawn Henry, changelogger 
Regrets
PP: Pasquale Popolizio 
Strategy of work - What to do with normative documents like ATAG 20
Background (from agenda):
E-mail exchange about ATAG 20 glossary:

Dear Jan,
Following up the e-mail exchange between Helle and you about the ATAG2.0 glossary. The EOWG is planning to compile a beginners Lexicon consisting max 50 word or phrases with a description in plain and clear language to mainly aid translators of WAI document.
We noticed that the ATAG2.0 glossary will become part of a normative document that means that making changes will not be easy. There might be entries from the ATAG glossary that we also want to have in the Beginners Lexicon. To know whether there is any time left to discuss the descriptions of some entries it will be good to know when we have to be ready with selecting our entries etc.
Could you please give us details/thoughts/deadlines about this issue and the closing of the ATAG document?
Kind regards,
Henk Snetselaar
======================

Henk,
Thanks for following up on this. You are correct that the ATAG 2.0 glossary is normative. The reason for this is that many of the defined terms appear in the normative success criteria of the guidelines.

In terms of timelines for outside review of the ATAG 2.0 glossary, we have
actually just published a last call draft of ATAG 2.0
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-ATAG20-20041122/>;, so we urge you to take a look
at this and return any comments to the AUWG by January 7, 2005 at the latest.

Thanks again for your interest.
Cheers,
Jan


Minutes:
Henk: The ATAG 2.0 as well as the ATAG glossary are becoming a normative document. Helle mentioned to Jan Richards that EO is planning to compile a beginners' lexicon for translators. The e-mails between Jan and me are included in the agenda. ATAG document is a normative document. also the glossary is normative. Many words described in the glossary are part of the success criteria of the guidelines. There should be always an agreement on every change in the document so it is not sure that it is ready. Jan responded that we have time till January to make suggestions if we want. What I have now done is looking up in the words we have selected until now, how many words are part of the ATAG glossary. only three that is not much. We should look what words are in  the ATAG glossary and if we are satisfied with the description or not. does anybody have a suggestion? which possibility to do the description? 

Shawn: wonder if schedule to evaluate these words particularly. which one might be included and those we are confortable with the definition.

Henk: for the next round have to go through the whole ATAG glossary and see which words we want to have in our lexicon.

Analysis characters b-g
Background (from agenda):
some more information for the teleconference

Minutes:
We should now discuss how people did make selection of the words. If you think of ten to 15 words there are yet 53 words selected by all of us. Captions (5 selection) it ends with one time (only one from us choose the document). There is a document describing the translation priority from WAI. Two different compiled: one short one (quick work) and one with bigger documents (techniques) to aid translators. list of priorities to take words from documents that are in high position in the list of translation priorities. Helle, how did you make your choice?

Helle: when I look at the words only looked at the printable glossary. looked at it saying what words would not be understandable like dtd. in rather a personal way. words regarding disability. don't know if you would look in this lexicon if you would not find them somewhere else. In an ordinary dictionary to find some expression. may be a more technical words collection.

Henk: who translated WAI documents? (Helle, Sylvie)

Sylvie: I did not choose the words only from the perspective of the translators. I chose the words that relate to a disability (like blindness, dyslexia, colour blindness). I took also more technical words coming from documents like WCAG like Event handlers, client-side scripting. I did not choose words from more complex documents like SVG. But now that I understand we should have looked for words for translators I would take another chance and make a different selection.

Libby: I chose words that are difficult for English speakers. a lot of terms that native English speakers may have problems with.

Shawn: We are not using blindness in an unique way in those documents. our biggest challenge is to limit the list.

Henk: it's important to look for what documents are, that the documents are in the list of translated priorities. I'm also looking to words that have WAI specific meaning. sometimes very easy words, like documents, like content. those can also have a rather specific WAI meaning, although it is an easy word. it was a criteria whether you look in a dictionary for a work, or if you have to explain the WAI meaning of the document. it is rather logical that we come with words that come from the pwd document. If we look up in that list with the one we have been choosing most: start with captions, device-independent. and equivalents (all are in the ATAG glossary). if you look at the end of the list, binding (is from the x-forms) you come to documents that are not a high priority for translators.. I put column headers that is an important concept. It is a nice work to compare all your contributions. Although Sylvie asked for second chance we say we would not do that and go through the first 12 words. colour blindness is chosen four or five times. It is correct. Some people translating the documents would not know some words specific to disabilities. Does the pwd document have its own glossary you mean?

Shawn: including the words that are disability specific but not WAI specific versus pointing to the document how pwd use the web?

Helle: I think if we include these words like blindness, colour blindness, we might come to the situation where we did mention this or that disability.. I'm afraid we end up with discussion about what disability to include or to exclude.

Henk: i'm afraid that we will have that always. Asking why this or that word? What Shawn was saying has a lot of sense. Because blindness or colour blindness (the meaning which is used) is disability specific, then we have to point to the pwd document for the right meaning.

Shawn: correct. it's a general disability definition and should not be included in this specific glossary. section 3 of pwd document. more description than formal definition. I think may be a pointer to that section rather than repeating it. How often those are used in the documents people are going to translate.

Henk: if the word comes from more than a document we should have it. And the blindness is called from the pwd and the colour blindness. do you mean that none of these words should be in the lexicon?

Shawn: proposing that.

I like that too (carol helle)

Henk: It is not the case for other words like captions. Perhaps it's explained in the ATAG or WCAG document itself.

Shawn: not in terms of words but in terms of disabilities. blind, colour blindness is not specific to web accessibility. no unique definition in how using those in WAI documents.

Henk: you can look this up in a dictionary.

Shawn: how important is this for our documents?

Henk: when we do training we talk about specific words etc... but we show how people use a computer. we show a Braille display and they realise how it is to start working with a disability.

Shawn: that is what pwd document would give, not the glossary.

Helle: difference in word Braille and refreshable Braille. have braille and refreshable in the glossary.

Sylvie: should have braille and assistive technologies in the dictionary, so not include them in the glossary because it is not WAI specific.

Carol: we use the word cognitive wrong. add evaluation to the glossary?

Henk: when people start reading about Web accessibility they should know how to check. conformance is important. Conformance evaluation should be added. Does it replace conformance?

Helle: leave both of them for the time being.

Shawn: EO is not meeting before deadline for glossary. on 24 and 31. Need eo comments before that. have to write recommendations. If EO or the Task Force wants to comment on those.

Henk: with this experience we can look at the ATAG work. Work very quick till next Monday go through ATAG list. speak the words that we think that should be in our lexicon. We have now twelve words from b-g and some with question marks. nice number to take in the lexcon. Make an appointment for the week after now. make a compilation of that and compile. I would like to receive contributions to ATAG glossary before the end of the week.

Helle: When do we look at the next letters?

Henk: concentrate on ATAG for this week. Do the next characters from H to O in two weeks.



++++++++++++++++++++++
Lexicon addresses information:
- Lexicon e-mail list: public-wai-eo-lexicon@w3.org 
- WAI (Printable) Glossary: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/Glossary/printable.html 
- First draft of a Lexicon overview:  http://www.w3.org/WAI/lexicon/Overview.html 
- Lexicon requirements document: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-lexicon 
- Lexicon Task Force Work Statement: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2004/lexicon.html 
- Lexicon list archives: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-eo-lexicon 
- Translation priorities: http://www.w3.org/WAI/translation.html 
++++++++++++++++++++++

Regards,
Henk Snetselaar


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
H. Snetselaar
Bartimeus Educational Institute for the Blind and Partially Sighted &
Foundation Bartiméus Accessibility
Utrechtseweg 84, 3702 AD  Zeist, the Netherlands
Tel: +31-(0)30-6982211 or +31(0)30-6982350
Fax: +31-(0)30-6982388
E-mail: H.Snetselaar@bartimeus.nl 
Website: www.bartimeus.nl and www.accessibility.nl 
Zie voor disclaimer (Read our disclaimer): www.accessibility.nl/disclaimer.html 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

*** eSafe scanned this email for malicious content ***
*** IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders  ***

Received on Tuesday, 21 December 2004 12:09:44 UTC