Susan Hewitt introduced herself
Brent: We have been working on the Planning tool in the past and done broad specs. It was shelved for other work and Kevin has been re-orienting EO to the resource.
Kevin: A question on the weekly survey to intro the Personas doc?
<kevin> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Planning/Personas
<kevin> http://w3c.github.io/wai-dynamic-planning/
Kevin: and the Prototype.
... survey feedback was positive, nothing to discuss, no real questions or objections. Is there anything else to add at this time?
David: Wanted to complement the work, liked how they were culturally balanced. Have we thought about the way to address non roman alphabets? Development challenges that arise from that?
Kevin: No there has not been anything like that considered as part of the personas, do you have suggestions?
David: Recently doing alt text in site with pictographic approaches, left to right languages, etc. Should we make people aware of translations or considerations related to that?
Kevin: We have not much gone into the "can of worms" but I think some of what you have mentioned may be appropriate for tutorials. For the next phase of the Proptotype development, perhaps you can suggest something specific?
David: Yes such as some of the tools we love do not work in other languages. We can just look out for recommendations that we make that may not work in all languages and make alternative suggestions.
Shadi: It is an interesting and important point. I like the idea of thinking about how to refer to translations.
... are you suggesting an additional persona or to weave these considerations into one of those we have already developed? Next year we will be looking at internationalization and inclusion more specifically.
David: Perhaps we identify languages and location or audiences for the product and sprinkle them in so that it is integrated. Tht way we will not always assume that we are necessarily working in English.
Shadi: Yes good idea. Keep in mind however that our personas will not be public but are only meant to help us focus the planning materials to meet all the needs.
... Kevin, any mention of internationalization?
Kevin: No not as yet, but not hard to add at this point. Will do.
Shadi: David will it address your concern to include with one of the existing persona?
David: Yes I think that will help us and become part of how we roll, what we always do.
Kevin: If there is nothing more about the Personas, let's look at the Prototype. With hindsight we will style this more in line with the Tips. So consider instead the structure, the phases, the relevance of various activities within the phases, etc. So far we have not gotten any substantive comments, wonder if anyone wants to comment now?
Brent: And for background should let new folks know that we did a card sort, created categories and refined them over a period of weeks. The result was this set of categories and wanted everyone to know that background.
... other than editors and chairs, can we get a general sense of what folks think about structure and content...more of an appraisal of the approach. Any thoughts, comments, questions?
<Susan> I'm trying to look it over more carefully
David: Am I correct that what is here is unchanged since Friday?
<George> From what I have reviewed...it is a good approach
Kevin: Next topic is a general acceptance of the approach, confidence that we are going in the right direction. We seem to have general agreement from the survey results.
<George> +1 George
<davidberman> +1 David
RESOLUTION: General acceptance of approach and OK for Kevin to move forward, review activities in detail and develop the resource in this context.
<yatil> +1
<James> +1
<Howard> +1
<Susan> +1 Susan
+1
<Brent> +1
<davidberman> +1
<George> +1 George
<kevin> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Planning/Categories
Kevin: Next up will be to look more carefully at the activities related to each category.
... it is a general description, would like for people to go through, look for the gaps, look for mis-match between activity and category, priority within each section.
... not really word-smithng yet, but looking at the activities in more detail.
Brent: Follow-up questions for Kevin after looking at it for a minute?
... anything else on this topic?
<davidberman> thumbs up.
<yatil> https://w3c.github.io/wai-wcag-quickref/
Brent: The MockUp of how to meet WCAG will take the place of the existing one, is a dynamic and interactive way for people to find what they need. Have recently been looking at ways to filter out and focus in on what is needed. Have been working on taxonomy of tags and how they relate to topics/problems of interest.
Eric: There is now new introductory text developed this week. Use "About this reference" to display more text, will continue to work on it. Tried to incorporate all of the comments from the survey. Please review it, see how your comments have been addressed.
Sharron: we can comment in GitHub?
Eric: To comment, add an issue in GitHub.
<yatil> Intro text issue
Brent: Welcome to continue this conversation, but urge everyone to read prior discussion to be sure we are not going in circles.
Eric: We do not want to include *everything* in the current How To Meet, but we do have to explain some things like what are Success critieria, etc.
Shadi: I believe that this will be a specific question in the upcoming survey, is that right?
... so if Sharron volunteers and I will too to work on it, the entire group can comment in next week's survey?
... it will be refined until Tueday, place in the survey and then presented for full review of the group.
<shadi> +1 to "Show Filtered Items"
Eric: At this time, the heading should be "Filtered Out Success Criteria." There was no real "winner" in the suggestions for how to call this section. The most clear thing seemed to me to be "Filtered Out..." with a brief intro text. Thoughts?
Sharron: Sounds like a clear explanation - how was it on the page, too much? just enough?
Eric: Seemed fine to me.
Shadi: The question for you Eric is to get to resolution today do you need more input? I don't have strong feelings but would prefer something that starts with a verb. "Show Hidden Items" or something like that.
<shadi> "Show hidden items"
James: I agree we need an action word to start the phrase "show filtered items" would let people know that something is hidden.
<James> And "items" keeps it succinct
Shadi: How does that work for you Eric "show hidden items"?
Eric: If I know about the whole resource and how it works, it would be fine. Not sure it is clear enough for the heading of the whole section.
Shadi: Thinking more of the link text.
Brent: Suggestions are: Show Hidden Items, Show Filtered Out Success Criteria,...other suggestions?
<James> Show filtered items
James: I like "Filtered Items"
... it is a bit ambiguous, maybe "Show Filtered Items" and let Show indicate that they are currently hidden.
<kevin> +1 to James' suggestion
<George> +1 Show filtered Items
Howard: Items is a bit open-ended and success criteria makes it clear.
<yatil> (1) show hidden items, (2) show filtered items, (3) show filtered-out items, (4) show filtered success criteria
Howard: in favor "Show filtered Success Criteria"
Shadi: It will take you to a section where there could be more information, does that help?
Howard: I will go with consensus, but my problem with show hidden items.
Sharron: 4
<Howard> 4
<James> 4
<kevin> 2 or 4 or 'Show Filtered' :)
<yatil> In order: 3, 4, 2, 1
<Susan> 4
Brent: When we are talking about the link, not the title so we are considering what the link text should say.
<shadi> +1 to Brent's point!
Brent: using the word show do people expect to go to the filters they have chosen rather than the the ones they have omitted.
<James> Good point!!!
<shadi> "View filtered Success Criteria" maybe?
<yatil> +1 to View
<Howard> "view" might be better
<James> +1
Eric: Or we could move the link somewhere else. Since the text in the bar is for information, not navigation.
Brent: I like "View"
<James> View
<shadi> View
<George> View
<kevin> View
<yatil> View
Brent, who wants Show or View
<Howard> View
<Susan> seems view is winning
View
<Susan> I was going to say show, lol
<yatil> (1) view hidden items, (2) view filtered items, (3) view filtered-out items, (4) view filtered success criteria, (5) view filtered-out success criteria
Sharron: Suggestion: View Success Criteria omitted by filters
<shadi> 1 but happy to go with 4 too
<Howard> 4
<Susan> 4 or 1
<George> 4
<yatil> 5 or 4
<kevin> 2 or 4
<James> 4 or 1
Brent: Ask for a resolution
**Note that this resolution passed but was overruled after further discussion**
RESOLUTION: Proceed with "view filtered success criteria" as the text pending wider input from EO and WCAG
<davidberman> +1
Brent: Susan, this is a deliverable to create showcase examples of people with disabilities using accessible technology and as a result their lives are improved.
<Brent> Scenarios and Descriptions: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Showcase_Examples_with_Videos/Scenario_Descriptions
Shadi: Scenarios are in place, we have taken some surveys about the approach. Got input about consistancy, positive approach, etc in the summer survey. This one resulted in more focus on detail and that we are in a place of general understanding and drilling down to the text etc, where references go, adding sign language, where the more info links go, and more.
... these are higher level issues but in terms of the approach itself we believe that people are satisfied with the basics of the scenarios and that we are ready to move on to develop the screenplays and stories.
... we are seeking a resolution to accept the approach and that the story board production can begin. If anyone feels their comments much be addressed, please speak up now.
<davidberman> +1
RESOLUTION: EO accepts the current scenarios and basic approach and the TF should proceed to develop the story boards.
Shadi: next is to discuss the selection of video production company, looking for samples of work and people who have the right match of experience. Will bring review and approval of story boards back to EO before filming begins.
Brent: One of the reasons we were looking for high level review was the fact that we have resources from Pearson and Comcast to help guide us and to review the comments that you submitted. We heard loud and clear that we want a human story not a technical one and we expect that the experience of the crew and the TF members will guide that.
Brent: a point of info for Susan, this work is being done within a Task Force working outside of the full EO group and we will bring the work in from time to time for review and apporval.
... any other questions or comments on that?
<Susan> thanks Brent
David: I proposed a few other video samples by email.
Brent: Yes thanks and Kevin suggested some companies with interesting videos as well and we will share the examples with the chosen company/
<James> +1
Eric: Let's try to replicate the heading from the link to support consistancy. Then we will have the text "the follwing SCs are not shown..."
Brent: If you say "Filtered..." the question becomes whether the semantics of that statement are important enought to say we should use "filtered out"
James: My thoughts are that "show" mitigated some of the ambiguity of "filtered" and that view does not do that.
... but the phrase "filtered-out" seems awkward when written on the page.
<Howard> agree that "filtered-out" is awkward
<davidberman> agreed.
James: There should be enough of a congruity between the link text and the section heading.
<James> How about view items hidden by filter
Howard: I would go with "View Hidden SC" to indicate you are revealing something that is not currently shown.
David: Than you would use Hide rather than Filter? in order to maintain consistency in structure.
Eric: Excluded success criteria?
Sharron: I like that, and suggested omitted earlier
<George> +1 Excluded
<Howard> like either one
David: Excluded is prefereable since omitted has a connotation of error.
<Susan> agreed, +1 to either
Brent: Consider changing the link text to View excluded Success Criteria and changing title to excluded Success Criteria
James: Support the heading saying that but can the link say "Which Success Criteria did I exclude?"
Kevin: "What has been excluded"
Howard: Can leave the section heading as it is "Filtered Success Criteria" to tie it back to the filters and the whole process that you undertook and the use of the tool itself.
<James> "What was filtered out?" Link
Howard: if there is confusion about why they were excluded and tie back to the filter will be reassuring
<James> What did the filter remove?
<James> Survey question?
<Howard> I like "What did the filter remove?" as the link text
<Howard> Then you can keep the filter language below
<Susan> not "out"
Sharron: I think we are close to resolution and it would be something like: Change link text to "What did the filter remove?" and leave heading below as "Filtered Success Criteria"
<davidberman> no objection.
<Brent> +1
<Howard> no objection from me
<George> +1
RESOLUTION: Change link text to "What did the filter remove?" and leave heading below as "Filtered Success Criteria"
<kevin> +1
<James> +1
<Howard> +1
<Susan> +1
Eric: Last week we discussed scroll bar implementation. Discussed with Shadi, I am bit torn. This seems to work OK-ish, but could be a problem for users who are not used to scrollable containers.
... please send comments on GitHUb
... also have to talk about the public review where it goes into the world for comment.People will see it who hav e had nothing to do with its development. Before public review is OK'd we will have a joint survey with EO and WCAG-WG. It will go live next week after WCAG meets and will ask if there are objections to public review.
... we are seeking public input after EO and WCAG give a green light. A good opportunity to get more info. And as you comment, indicate if something is so severe that it must be done before public review or concurrent.
... probably out on Tuesday.
... it will be separate from our EO weekly survey as the WCAG will also be commenting.
... questions?
Brent: Table the Tips update til next meeting.
Sharron: Quick reminder of dates - CSUN in March, AccessU in May, be thinking about possible Face to Face meetings for EO
Brent: We will update Work for this Week today and next week there will be two surveys, so stay alert to those - weekly EO and joint WCAG and EO on QuickRef.
... be sure to check Work for thei Week are things that are not reflected in the survey. Be sure to review the entire list of items before doing the survey.