Re: EOWG - for 16-17 September - Training review comments

EOWG:

Though I'll be on the call with atendees momentarily, here are my 
comments, inline, for the record.

At 01:09 PM 9/16/2010, you wrote:
>EOWG,
>
>Please read this e-mail and prepare replies for this week's EOWG 
>teleconference. Feel free to send comments in e-mail.
>
>Training Overview page: http://www.w3.org/WAI/training/
>Training review survey: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/waitraining2b/
>
>Most of the comments in the review survey were editorial. Some of 
>the edits were already incorporated in the 20 August version that 
>most people reviewed. The following comments and edits are for EOWG 
>consideration:
>
>1. Some people suggested that the Presentations and Workshop 
>material was hard to read and seemed congested, partly because of 
>all the links throughout the content bullets. To address this we've 
>unlinked a lot of the text and removed some of the bracketed 
>material. This means readers will need to get the previously linked 
>information from the Topics page, instead of getting it from the 
>outlines pages.
>
>Question: Do these edits take care of the congestion?

JS:  I think they do.

>2. In the Workshop material, many of the links went to the WCAG 2.0 
>Understanding or Techniques document. We moved the links from 
>throughout the content bullets to a new section called 
>"Understanding WCAG 2.0" Resources (or "Understanding WCAG 2.0" and 
>"Techniques for WCAG 2.0" Resources).
>
>Question: OK?

JS: I think so.


>3. For the Workshop page, there was a suggestion to clarify who 
>might do the training, adjusting the content and examples to suit 
>the audience, etc.
>
>Note that we had previously agreed not to include general 
>presentation and training guidance in this update of the resource.
>Some additional guidance has been added to the "Important Notes" 
>section: http://www.w3.org/WAI/training/workshop-outlines.html#notes
>
>Question: Does this section now adequately clarify that experience 
>is needed to present the material and that the workshop should be 
>customized for the audience, without going into too much detail?
>
>JS: These changes seem like a good idea and are well done.


>4. Linking to draft slides.
>
>Question: Is OK to go ahead and add pointers to the following draft 
>slides, or should we wait until they are more done?
>* [DRAFT] Instructions for the "Web Accessibility is Smart Business" 
>Presentation http://www.w3.org/WAI/presentations/bcase/
>* [DRAFT] Instructions for the "Using WCAG 2" Presentation 
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/presentations/WCAG2_using/
>
>JS: It depends on how close to done they are.

In terms of the slide sets that aren't yet available, might it be a 
good idea to change those references to "coming soon?"

One thing to consider, from a PR/communication standpoint, are the 
benefits and drawbacks of EOWG's launching a lot of documents at the same time.

I'm hoping these training materials can generate some "buzz," and it 
depends on how strategic you all want to be about that.

I intend to do my part to publicize.



>5. Any objections to publishing this version as a Draft for public review?
>
>JS: I have no objections.

Jennifer

Received on Friday, 17 September 2010 12:43:25 UTC