Resource Management Tool update

<yatil> Resource Management Tool

Eric: Submissions to the tool went very well, some people left some place holder text that created links that were not valid. I removed those and did a little clean-up but mostly the submission process went quite well.
... there were a couple of cases where the @@@ placeholders caused problems or trying to put quotes in side the values. I will update the template to include those.

<yatil> Finding Your WAI

example of edit interface

Eric: Thanks for everyone doing the work, putting in your resources.

Brent: Thanks Eric and just a reminder to everyone to put in your resources into the tool. Any questions?

<Susan> thanks for making a new comments column Eric

WAI site redesign

Brent: The redesign TF has been working, currently on personas.

Sharron: The personas are Current Redesign Personas

Sharron: Personas were developed from surveys (rather than in-person interviews) and as yu recall from the face to face, James and others requested personification of the needs of our audiences. They asked for personas to hang on the virtual wall during redesign to keep in mind: "Are we meeting the needs fo these personas? Do they represent our diverse audience? are they realistic and true?
... we have had about 100 survey responses. Some of those who took the survey have asked to see the personas -- so we'll probably announce to WAI IG and would first appreciate approval from EO first.

James: Thanks Sharron for describing the process and where we are now. I think personas are really really improtant to the design process, allowing us to keep user needs in mind. Please help us make sure we got it right.

Brent: Any questions or comments from the group?
... there is a question on the weekly survey that will give you the opportunity to comment.

Web Accessibility Perspectives (text)

Shadi: Thanks to all those who provided comments. I have made updates to the pages and have worked through the comments with those who submitted them and have a new version on GitHub. There are 5 remaining issues, 3 to discuss today and 2 for the weekly survey.

<Brent> Web Accessibility Perspectives: http://w3c.github.io/wai-showcase-examples/Overview.html

<Brent> Issue #233: https://github.com/w3c/wai-showcase-examples/issues/233

Shadi: Issue #233 is on deck for discussion - on Learn More section of overview page the links are quite generic. In the sub-pages, we have more specific links about the topic in question.
... the question is if someone comes to the sub pages, they may need the generic links as well and have bypassed the overview.

Susan: I thought we discussed this and chose to move the repetitive list to the main page. I prefer not to add a whole additional list of links, could we not link back to the overview list?

<Susan> There is a navigation on the left. They can click through to any of them.

Shadi: What do people think of this proposal, link back to the overview page?

<Susan> *any* general links

Shawn: How much of them really overlap? For example the intro to web accessibility does not overlap at all, but the "How People with Disabilities Use the Web" is 100% overlap, what about tutorials?

Shadi: Low coverage on those.

Shawn: So maybe we just add one link to the subpages - only the one that is the Intro to Accessibility

<Brent> where would you suggest it be added Shawn?

Susan: That link is already on the navigation on the left - why add it again?

Shawn: Our usability testing data shows that many people do not even see the navigation on the left. And many people find it cluttering and annoying and simply avoid it.

Brent: I would probably not make the connection that some resource in the main navigation might be helpful, so I would not think to look at those for additional resources.

<shawn> +1 to brent

<shawn> ftr, I do not feel strongly either way

Howard: Might be useful to add a link back to video overview page for simplicity and clarity.

<shawn> [ there is a link to "Overview" under the video ]

Shadi: Why would someone follow that link since all the videos are there?

<Susan> to Howard's point...we're contributing to the tendency to avoid or "screen it out." By adding even more to the page we risk that. This is part of a bigger pattern we need to move away from in our redesign.

Howard: Sometimes people want to be back at the starting point.
... Since the intro docs are linked from the overview page, that would be a reason to give people a chance to access it without adding repetitive links to each video section.

Eric: I don't think we need general links on the sub pages, they add clutter and people will not be expecting them. Maybe emphasize the page navigation - previous, next, overview page.

Shadi: Are you suggesting that you can provide a design overview - thank you!
... to Howard's point there actually already is a link back to the overview page but it gets lost. Does it need a design update to emphasize it?

<Brent> If they were buttons, you would find them easier.

Howard: Yes, that would probably do it, but I don't feel strongly.

Shawn: My strong feeling is that people never see links at the bottom.

<Susan> Shawn, data point or assumption? Do we have analytics yet?

<Howard> agree on need to avoid clutter

Shadi: Remember that our primary audience are people who have little or no understanding, experience with accessibility.

<shawn> Susan, assumption. Yes we have analytics -- however, that doesn't tell us how many people read the links at the bottom. Would need eye tracking for that. :-)

Eric: Could use an expand/collapse and hide those things. If you want to learn more, you can open links.

Shawn: I thought we had come to the conclusion that we should not duplicate the list on the overview page.

<yatil> +1 for not repeat

All: agree

Shawn: I said maybe we could add one link - the intro to accessibility.

<yatil> +1 to add link to the introduction as the first link in every learn more section

<Howard> I would lean against

Shadi: where?

Shawn: at the beginning of the Learn More section.

Shadi: any objections to that?

Brent: Is the first link in a list now specific to the current video topic?

Shadi: Yes, currently all the links are specific to the topic.

<Susan> +1 to Brent

Brent: Then I do object to it being at the top.

<James > +1 to Brent

<Laura> +1 to Brent

<shawn> +some

Brent: I would propose that it be at the bottom rather than the top.

<yatil> -1 to Brent, instead structuring differently, not feeling strongly

<shawn> [ I wonder about making the general link not in the list -- a paragraph - clarying that it's general]

Shadi: Shawn has modified her proposal so that it becomes a general comment with an inline link - is that OK?

Brent: Yes that seems fine.

<shawn> [ and then introduce the list with something like "... Specific information on [topic]:"

<shawn> +1

Howard: I wonder if we should just leave it as is. I am a little bit opposed to adding more links. As it is now, we have links that are related to the topic of the page. To introduce a more general resource that is not specific to the topic seems distracting, unnecessary. I would not want to add more resource links, rather better navigation.

<yatil> +1 to prefer leave as is

<shawn> "See general _Introduction to Web Accessibility_ or specific information on Keyboard Compatibility:

<Laura> +1 to Howard and agree that the page navigation will be improved with the redesign

<Brent> +1 to leave as is

<Susan> We're contributing to our problem by adding more links

Shadi: Remember this is for people completely new to accessibility, I am not sure it is irrelevant. Are we helping people by giving them more general info?

<Susan> +1 to leaving (status of page, not the EU)

Shawn: See example added above

<Howard> +1 to leave as is

RESOLUTION: Learn More section of Web Perspective video sub pages remains as is with no additions of general resources.

<yatil> �0 - I would prefer to link [variety of situation] to the overview. - Not feeling strongly.

Shadi: Thanks now to consider issue #257

<Brent> Next, Issue #257: https://github.com/w3c/wai-showcase-examples/issues/257

Shadi: the intro sentence is suggested to be moved below the video.

Sharron: I like it at the top and appreciate the drumbeat of the repetition. Seems to me it ties them together - creates a mantra that continues to remind them of the bigger idea.

<shawn> +1 to leaving it

Susan: Yes I can live with it, it's fine.

<shawn> +1 to this paid off!

RESOLUTION: Intro sentence to remain at the top of the video subpages

<Brent> Next, Issue #254: https://github.com/w3c/wai-showcase-examples/issues/254

Shadi: Issue #254 the transcripts on the default video, the one with no AD there is no visual information.
... however, on the AD versions the transcript does include the visual information
... The alternative is to have only one with all the information, but that does not sync to the video.
... it is a transcript that highlights as you read and as they are pronounced within the video.

Shawn: It is an awesome feature!

<yatil> +1 to remove visual descriptions from videos where the visual description is not spoken out

<Susan> no issues

<Brent> no issue

Shadi: Side bar note, the maker of the player is open to suggestions about the design of the controls. For now the question is if it is OK that the default version of the transcript does not have the audio description.
... another consideration is that as it is now, it syncs with the video.
... my suggestion is to leave as is.

Sharron: +1

Shadi: There will be 2 more questions on the weekly survey and hopefully we will wrap this up next week and have a complete resource.

RESOLUTION: Transcripts of videos will stay as is.

UI Components List

<yatil> Current Components List

<yatil> Proposal for Expectation Management

<shadi> [[Kartoffel Films blog - Accessibility Matters

Eric: A few weeks back we discussed the list and the issue of what we can provide and how do we stand behind the quality. Shadi has proposed some guidelines, it has been extremely helpful in describing the problem and various approaches that are possible.
... we have summarized the issues and the problems and asked everyone to review this. We want to avoid posting of bad code or people publicly dissing each other. So we want to address these issues.
... first is managing expectations which involves renaming the resource and the disclaimer. Next we will increase the information the submission process asks for, asking them to think through the criteria, raising the bar. We encourage componenet owners to take accountability, giving us someone to speak with and coordinate with.
... also make sure that users understand there own responsibility and finally engage the community to flag issues and help with the oversight.
... there is a detailed action plan. Have people read that?

<Susan> have read but could use a summary

<Howard> have not read - will read now

<Susan> maybe just the action plan?

Eric: The action plan integrates those approaches as follows. First is to improve the resource title to make sure people don't think these are fully accessible out of the box. There is a wiki page with brainstorms for a new title. Next is the vetting process, a very open and clear problem. The process submission form is a Wordpress comment form that will be displayed publicly. Will provide a statement builder, ensuring that submitters make an accessibility statement that is clearly aligned to WCAG.

Eric: Want to highlight comment threads, not sure how we will do that yet. Will recruit expert volunteers to check new entries, not a full vetting but more of a 'hives' or sanity check to establish at least a baseline. Will have a core set of rules for the sanity check that will be updated regularly.
... establish response process so that the component owners will answer comments and if they do not within a certain time, will be re-evaluated and perhaps removed.
... revise or create the statements and instructions that clearly reflect this process so that it is really, really clear what is the expectation.

Brent: The purpose of bringing it to the meeting is to drive to resolution. So we would like to allow any questions or comments at this time.

Susan: I think this is a good action plan. However, this is putting a pretty heavy load on submitters and volunteer reviewers that it may slow down growth of the tool. I understand that we must protect the integrity of the tool but think we are going to hobble growth.

Eric: Yes, we know that but felt that we must do this and once the process is in place look for ways to streamline.

Howard: You need for there to be a certain number of resources there in order for people to use it, I worry about people being discouraged by the process.
... and then the question arises about what will we do with the ones that have been submitted already?
... might it be better to have an internal process that stars or designates the one that *have* been checked.

Eric: We understand and will ask those that are submitted to go in and follow the process.

Susan: I think Howard's point is good and I further worry about the author being the only one who can submit rather than people being able to say "Here is a tool I really like."

Brent: I agree with Howard about the ones that are already there - will they have to be removed? The other thing is the importance of documentation of the process so that people have confidence.

Sharron: If I can channel Denis here for a minute remember he asked us - if we can't have a process that validates the components, why do it at all? People were really struck by that commment and the fact that W3C and WAI are rightly held to a high standards. I suggest we put a fairly rigorous vetting process in place, see how it works. Then we find ways to streamline the process, see if we mostly get high quality submissions and can then maybe loosen some of the requirements. But at this point it seems that if we err it should be on the side of quality rather than quantity. Seems really important to give people confidence in the quality.

<shadi> +1 to sharron - hope just a kick-start issue to overcome

Eric: good point.
... raise the bar at the beginning. can see how it works - might be able to open it up in the future
... not set in stone - action plan to get it off the ground

Bbrent: Well, I have been having the same thoughts as Susan - gosh, are we gonna drive everyone away? But could agree to set standard high at beginning and see what happens.

<Laura> +1 to sharron also

Brent: if too much, then we can rethink it. Agree to error on the side of being too high as well

Eric: want to have resolution. think support from sharron?

<Susan_> no opposition from this end

shawn: introduce today and use the survey for approval

Brent: some out today. will put on survey. any [other] specific comments added, edited, or changed?
... thanks Shadi and Eric!

Resource Development Life Cycle

Brent: We had a survey question about this and received some comments. James will look at comments next week and bring back his response to the next meeting.

<Shawn> "https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Stage_4._Draft#For_Editors_-_Handling_comments"> Editors Guide to Responding to Comments

Brent: [reviews method for addresssing comments]

Howard: [tangent] Is there a guide like this for the process for editing our resources?

Shawn:Before you decide to make a lot of changes, bring it to the editors and chairs first, so we can decide on priorities. Then we can put it into github at some point.

Howard: I thought that any doc we have we want to update.

<Susan_> Howard what resource is it?

Shawn: Bring to EO planning group

Brent: Good point - process not clearly defined. We need to put that in Stage 6
... bring to EO Planning with your suggestions with what do to with it, e.g., specific edits. Then where to post drafts, etc. We need to spell that out in the sub-page -- Maintenance and/or Draft sub-page
... Bring the idea (and any work you've already done) to the Planning Meeting
... Chairs need to get the process down in writing so Resource Managers can refer to it
... Planning Meeting every Thur (Chairs, Team contact) + any Resource Manager who wants to talk about their resource
... we can help to drive work through telecons, surveys, etc. send e-mail to team-eo-plan@w3.org

Brent: we'll keep including that in the surveys - last question: "Do you have material for EO Planning" These are the growing pains of the process. We'll clarify and explain how managed and handled. So if you have a resource to make active, bring to the EO Planning meeting 8:00am Central on Thursdays. (except not next week since no meeting) so next is 7th July. Anyone is welcome!

Eric: might not need to attend everytime. sometimes can just do by e-mail
... when you do evaluations, make notes on changes to the document
... once ready, Eric is happy to create the GitHub repo
... as appropriate.

Brent: Right, may not have to come to the meeting. Can do by e-mail.

Howard: So do I ask for GitHub now? Or first get approval from Planning Team.

Brent: send e-mail to planning team that says "this is what I suggest we do to this resource..."

<yatil> Shawn: Two things: It can be Eric or Shawn to create github repository. FYI: The team-eo-plan is not public visible. Mail goes to Chairs, Editors, Team Contacts. But we can open it to others, too. Feel free to join the planning meeting to help plan the agenda - this is not some secret behind the scenes thing.

Shawn: e-mail is not publicly archived. anyone can get on list or come to planning meeting. (but assume most don't want the clutter)

Resource Check In (by Resource Managers)

Brent: Sharron and I are working on a more defined process - what are the high priority resources, what's the primary resouce that each is working on. Get a check-in rotation so you'll know when to share an update
... In future, we'll have a scheduled rotation for which item we're reviewing when
... so please use the tool - put your docs in

Eric: I made minor bug fixes to quickref. that's my resource update for this week. :)

Work for this Week

Brent: Will have weekly survey with a few questions. Later will have Web Accessibility Perspectives Approval Survey.
... Note that there will be no EO meeting next week.
... Please update your availability for telecons Telecon Availability
... F2F Availability Survey - added possibility of F2F in Nov in Co (w/ AHG)

Update Face to Face Availability

Shawn: We have a room provided by Howard at AHG. Want to see if critical mass for having a F2F then.

Brent: Also we want to start planning 2017 f2f so people can work that into their financial planning
... request budget for travel to get to them.
... will try to set by Aug or Sept
... don't want all in US if can meet in other areas that are convenient for others outside of US
...Remember:*** No Meeting July 1st ***
Thanks everyone!