Resource Management Tool

<shawn> https://w3c.github.io/wai-resources/

<Brent> Resource Management Tool

Brent: One of the things we're looking at when I started adding resources to the chart as an RM. I was confused by the urgency vs priority. If something was high priority wouldn't it also be urgent? Shawn and I looked at it and she agreed it's kind of redundant.

Brent: I proposed that the left column, priority, change to be active
... If I have a eight items and the one I start working on I'll mark it as active
... that way anyone looking at it can see it flagged as active
... or if they're looking by RM then they can see which of mine are active
... propose to change priority items buttons to say active items or active resources
... so when you click on it it will show you only the resources that are active
... Sharron agreed it's a good idea does anyone have reason in support or against

Proposal to change priority to column to active column

+1

<Brent> +1

<laura> +1

<shawn> +1

<Caleb> +1

<shawn> +1 Sharron

<Eric> +1 to using activity (had thought priority as priority for the group and urgency as urgency from the RM's pov, but I'm not opposed)

<shawn> [ Shawn adds GitHub issue]

<James> +1

Brent: If you use this tool and see things you thing need to be changed or could make it work better
... then shoot an email or set up a git hub email and we can look at it
... any other questions or comments about using the tool

Resource Manager Update

Brent: each week we'll keep having a RM update section on the agenda. We'll try to reach out to RMs to ask you to be ready to do an update
... if you're not ready you can ask to hold off until next week
... but we want to know what's going with the resource, if the rm needs assistance or if they're ready to bring it to the meeting. First on the list is Tips for Getting Started. Denis?

Denis: Sorry I was late
... we met yesterday to discuss what we'd want to do in the near future for this content and there was a big of a disconnect between what I had in mind and what was the expected scope.

<Brent> Current Published Tips: https://www.w3.org/WAI/gettingstarted/tips/index.html

<Brent> Additional three draft tips: https://w3c.github.io/wai-quick-start/

scribe: so instead of something more ambitious we can bring it back to the original intent of this project which is to update the three areas of content that are in the resources. Determine if we want to keep them
... we may not have enough resources to support it or what's there may be sufficient and may not need to keep a quick tips for that area
... I'll focus first on looking at those three to see if we want to push them to the finishline. I'll see if as a RM I'm comfortable with what we have now and then I would want to discuss with you guys another project that that would go further than what we current have now that we've agreed on goal for time being and I'll move forward next week.

Brent: thank you Denis
... we talked about how we got those first three tips out and we're happy we have your leadership to take a look at those other three tips and maybe get them published as well.
... pros and cons from everyone if those other three tips eval/managing/planning should be out there. That will help Denis to be able to lead a decision, advocate if we should move forward with them. EO has received good feedback on the three that are out there. We will now look for Denis to bring more content and proposals in the future. ... any Qs on quick tips/getting started?

<Denis> and the three other categories are evaluating, managing and advocating

Brent: next up on updates is WCAG 2.0 resources

<Brent> WCAG 2.0 Overview: https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.php

Brent: it's really bigger list of resources that I've grouped together
... If you go to the page ??? Overview page, when you hit that page there are several references. the reason I'm pulling all of these resources, I'm in charge of kind of a suite of resources. There's the WCAG resources, tells someone who's new to a11y exactly how all these pages to connect to each other. FAQ page about WCAG, gives a little more background about documents, where you should start... diff between 1 and 2, meets ISO standards, who its written for. We want to update that with more and ... there's another group of pages in that nav that outlines how 1.0 and 2.0 differ. How they sectioned into four guidelines. how it became more robust, any alignment between the two is oulined...
... another document is how to update your website from 1 to 2. Good for people who did a lot of work before to tell them how to update but the question is how long do we keep the references back to 1.0? Most people coming now are only coming to 2.0. So the suite of these resources are around 2.0 understanding. There's references to old quick ref tool that need to be updated
... there will be a lot of update to those pages. the most high priority ones the others are medium to low effort but do need to be addressed
... because there's probably new info that needs to be addressed. I'm also thinking about the redesign and in the redesign that there will probably be a place for new web designs that would contain this information but i'm trying to move forward without thinking of the redesign as we know we need to move forward

Denis: there was an article this week coming for the company Sitemore on LinkedIn
... caused a bit of a backlash in the a11y comunity because it was questioning the legitimacy of complying with 2.0 instead of 1.0. There was some misunderstanding on their end of the standards. WCAG 1.0 is not irrelevant but outdated. we've moved on a very long time ago

<shawn> "WCAG 2.0 was published in December 2008, and is recommended over WCAG 1.0. See Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview." <https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag10docs.php>

Denis: we need to make it very clear that people need to be foucusing on the newest version
... not discredit the standard but articles like that make me cringe because it makes people think accessibility is not achievable.

<Denis> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/wcag-20-accessibility-impossible-standard-provides-basis-michelle-hay-1

Sharron: we should know what misconceptions are prevalent so we can better address them.

Denis: Leonie Watson tweeted about this so brought it to my attention. their company markets a tool to automate a11y but the article seems grossly misinformed, their standpoint is so flawed. I was shocked to still see someone talk about 1.0 being the approach you should take

Brent: thanks for bringing that up. those were some of my thoughts looking at these resources

<shawn> ACTION: Shawn encourage updates to all /TR/WCAG 1.0 pages with notes pointing to WCAG 2.0 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/15-eo-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-366 - Encourage updates to all /tr/wcag 1.0 pages with notes pointing to wcag 2.0 [on Shawn Henry - due 2016-07-22].

<yatil-lurking> +1 much support

Brent: how long do we go on referencing 1.0. 2.0 came out 8 years ago. when do we move on?

<Denis> Excerpt from article: "Sitemorse are not trying to speak as experts, or want to defend anyone but, in discussing this, it seems that considerable numbers were at least heading towards WCAG 1.0 even though some considered it onerous and not all understood its importance. With a number of organisations achieving WCAG 1.0 (automated and manual checking in harmony to deliver accessibility), WCAG 2.0 is being considered overbearing and the sheer level of understanding and site work required to even start to embrace, let alone achieve it is seen as difficult to manage."

<yatil-lurking> [/me notes that WCAG 1.0 is a Standard that is not retired (yet), also lots of adoption around the world. Would be good to bring this up in WCAG WG.]

Denis: Their article questions relevancy of 2.0 saying it can't be met

<shawn> [/me not sure what is needed from WCAG WG. agree EOWG can do a little more to communicate...]

Brent: good comments, thanks Denis
... any more comments on this suite of resources, tips, ideas for me as I continue to look at them?
... know that that's coming. Probably only going to work on a couple of higher priority first like overview

<Susan> ... next is mobile a11y with Susan

<Brent> Mobile Accessibility Resource: https://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/

Susan: Judy, Shawn, and I met and discussed. Looking at related pages as one update.
... restructuring the page and first focus on the overview page.
... will get requirements analysis first for EOWG

Brent: as far as putting only three resources in tool as one or separately is up to you. I listed them separately as I knew I would work on them separately

Susan: OK, I will do the same

Brent: the second thing I thought was a good question to us was about the requirements document
... whether it should be for the resource as a whole if it didn't already have one or should there be
... one addressing the update of the resource

<shawn> [ fyi e-mail about Requirements Analysis https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-eo-editors/2016Jul/0006.html ]

shawn: if you don't know there's an existing requirements analysis feel free to ask me
... based on if there is one and if there's a need I can help you create one. That part should be quick and dirty. we just need to agree who's its for, what the requirments are

Brent: we refer to that often when we do a deep dive into a document to see if we're meeting the original scope

<shawn> +1 to Brent that the Requirements Analysis is often helpful in making decisions throughout development of the resource

Brent: it is referenced often so it's good to have
... anything else about mobile before we move on?
... next, anyone else who's a RM want to give a quick update?

Sharron: Laura do you have any resources yet?

Laura: no I haven't been assigned anything. I hesitate to pick something. it would be helpful if someone would assign something.

Sharron: At the planning meeting yesterday, we talked about this and have identified a coupel that we think will be well aligend with your skills and interests. Brent will talk to you offline about some of those suggestions

Brent: there's a couple that we were discussing that would be a good match for you. I'll email you
... any other updates?
... Last, are there any resource managers who want to volunteer to give an update for next week?
... know if you aren't on the list there's always time to jump in and give a quick update or let me know
... so I can get you on the list for the following week. We want to stay on track with these updates.
... next a potential new resource idea, Denis?

Potential new resource idea

Denis: In talking to developers, many observe that with Guidelines, SC's Understanding, Techniques, Failures, etc, there are more than 1000 pages. No one wants to read that. we're the only ones who want to read it. I've always wanted some kind of
... filter so you can look at a SC and get a high level idea of what it is and be well informed. You don't need to read it all but you could still feel empowered to take it on. I had thought that was quick tips would be about
... we have nothing to help people get betweening the TR and most people's practice. I can't expect my client to trust a personal website or blog. It becomes more of an authority sitting on a w3c site
... example, you have trouble with forms b/c you aren't managing focus with errors, so here's a one sheet to help you dig deeper. that's an idea of what I would like to move for that could also filter by roles. To me that would be like quick tips but would go deeper. And it would be another way to let people get to what they're interested in.
...I'd like to propose a new resource that would build on the current idea of the quick tips into something that is more ambitious. I have a very long list of requirements for accessibility, and each one could be turned into such a tip, kind of like a spec sheet to achieve accessibility for each particular problem we're trying to solve. Each such tip would be following a one to two page template, so they are all built following the same pattern (problem observed, implementation solution, source code example when appropriate, user story, treating methodology when appropriate, specification details, etc.), but remain bite-sized.
...These tips could be filtered by roles, so designers, developers, QA folks, content writers, etc. could only look at tips that are relevant to them for their job/role. Tips could also be structured according to a taxonomy, so they're organized based on categories, on top of the obvious Success Criterion organization, allowing people to only focus on those relevant to what they're working on.
...Such tips would fit nicely as an intermediary point between the existing SC definition in WCAG 2.0, and the Understanding document + related techniques. Currently, anyone who needs or wants to understand more about the intent of a SC has to go look into the Understanding document and it can be seen as a pretty daunting resource if someone only needs a quick confirmation and is not willing to dive that deep.
...These new resources would fill that intermediary role, creating kind of a smooth transition from the SC to the Understanding document. It's something we could build over the years, there could easily be hundreds of those tips, and with the upcoming additions of WCAG 2.1, lots more could be added as new ideas to my current list. This is something I've been wanting to build for a long time, and if I'm going to do this, I figure I might as well do this under W3C than as an independent.
...As a W3C resource, such documents could become a more authoritative reference for anyone doing accessibility assessments and wanting to point to convenient references to support their issue descriptions and remediation recommendations. I think it could be a tremendous help understanding WCAG in a way that is less intimidating and more adapted to people's needs than the Understanding documents.
...Hopefully that makes sense. it's ambitious but I think it has value and when I looked at the tips last year that was one of my ideas. The resource could always be growing, especially with future extentions to 2.0 re: cognitive, low-vision, mobile
... pretty much like the quick tips we have now. we could do something like that starting with low-level fruit
... lowers the barrier for people wanting to get into a11y

shawn: let's think big picture. some people have though over the years of progressive disclosure of info
... this feels like a layer between what we have... in the middle. I'm optimistic about it.

Brent: it resonated with me when you talked about link between SC and understanding document b/c when I talk to content creators at Pearson they ask 'what does that mean at pearson'
... the only source I have to show is 'understanding' Doc sometimes that helps but sometimes it falls flat. This could be a good fit, a robust resource

Denis: The idea of 365 a11y tips, one each day of the year was one I knew I could write about, it was a laundry list of a lot of tips
... and that's just me. if all of us were doing that we would have so many to share
... add in different roles and fields and there's so much accessibility work going on ...
... when they ask 'what does that mean?" they mean what does that mean to me as designer, project mgr, etc
... having all these lens that come to the SC from different views ???

Brent: you're right. when I talk to them they aren't interested in a11y, they just want to know what they have to do
... if we had something that could help them understand the why... that would make them more motivated

Denis: I have a grand idea of what we could and it could take years but I'm in love with the idea of looking at
... a long laundry list of what we could write about. and anyone who knows about that item could do it. It's not impossible. It may be an intimidating project but adds tremendous value. It excites me.

Shawn: couple of things. This is awesome. When I hear all these things, one of the flags is people say that WAI already has too much info
... I don't think it's too much info and it's just finding what you need. Let's make sure that we make it easy to find and filter this info if we do decide to do it.
... also, remember that the Understanding docs aren't static. if they aren't meeting your needs feel free to comment on them.

Brent: thanks Shawn. I didn't realize that so it's good to know.
... generally when I see TR pages I think those pages won't change b/c the WAI pages I think those can change. I

Shawn: well it may not be clear but all the techniques and understanding do get updated probably ever six months so you're welcome to submit suggestions
... it is a more formal update process but you are encouraged to comment.

Brent: thanks for that idea Denis. We know you'll work on Quick Tips first and share the next proposal when you're done.

WAI site redesign goals

<AnnaBelle> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/WAI_Website_Redesign

Brent: we have AnnaBelle and James on from redesign task force

<AnnaBelle> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/WAI_Site_Redesign_Goals

Brent: the redesign goals are internal so doesn't need to be polished

<shawn> [ This is kinda like the "requirements analysis" for the redesign. ]

Brent: we just need everyone to say if they agree with the goals

AnnaBelle: Has everyone had a chance to read them?

<shawn> [reading break...]

Shawn:

AnnaBelle: it's a quick read

Brent: let's pause for a few minutes, note in IRC when you're read them

<Denis> done reading as well

<James> Done

<Caleb> Done

<laura> Done

<Brent> Done

Sharrone: Sorry, yes I'm done had already read them

AnnaBelle: goals started with F2F after AccessU that's where we came up with
... 'create WAI site as number one go-to place for a11y' there's been lots of Qs since that
... we stuck that since he meant to a lot of us as a team but andrew, for example
... had good questions that helped us to clarify
... also input from W3c and Judy and Michael Cooper. any questions about it?

<shawn> [ Shawn was a bit concerned with it (#1 Go-To place) stand alone. AND now very comfortable with the paragraph explaining it ]

Denis: I think the document reflects what we discussed at AccessU

AnnaBelle: originally we didn't have a date in there but after talking to Judy
... she brought up the charter and she'd like us to have the redesign live a few months before the charter is due to be renewed.
... so the first Q of 2017 deadline tries to meet the needs of senior managament to get this rolled out
... Brent, I guess this goes back to you. I don't hear any Qs...

Brent: yes we want to have resolution on this as our internal goal.

<Denis> I'm ok with going to resolution - i think it reflects what we discussed

Shawn: minor thing from Judy in email

<shawn> Careful coordination with WAI and W3C people, including coordination with <a href="https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAGTA/">WCAG TA Project</a> work to improve discoverability and integration of WCAG 2.0-related resources.

Shawn: she wants to make sure above bullet is included

<shawn> Judy's email: <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-eo-site/2016Jul/0002.html>

Brent: added to short term goal or does a current bullet need to be expanded to include that?

AnnaBelle: the IA?

Shawn: no the coordination. it's a minor thing you can look at it later

AnnaBelle: I think it'd be good to edit it now so we can say EO signs off on it

Brent: yep let's update it so we can sign off here in the meeting

AnnaBelle: another thing, the fourth bullet I thought it would be good to have a number for page load time but I'm going to suggest trimming out bullet so we don't need an exact number

Brent: Shawn, if you could strike that in the document

Shawn: Is rapid page-load time high priority for short-term vs. secondary?
... did you see in Judy's email, that she mentioned that the scope and goals are quite ambitious

AnnaBelle I feel strongly that it should stay in current short term goals. in site designs I do that's one of the main things I see they really need. I don't think that's going to slow Eric down at all as tech lead

Brent: Is there anything else someone would like to bring up before we ask for acceptance on this document?

Do all present approve of WAI Site Redesign Goals https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/WAI_Site_Redesign_Goals

<James> +1

<shawn> +1

<AnnaBelle> +1

<Brent> +1

+1

<laura> +1

<Denis> +1

<Caleb> +1

Sharron: I'm good

RESOLUTION: EOWG approves WAI Site Redesign Goals

Brent: any last comments or questions for redesign?

AnnaBelle: ... are the personas considered approved as well?

shawn: had two minor comments I added last minute.

Brent: AnnaBelle if you want to look at those with Shawn and address them
... just work with the people who added the comments and it's been approved

work for this week and weekly survey

Brent: it will be short, asking people to review minutes and resolutions, reminder to update the RM tool. Eventually Sharron we can close the original resource survey. Reminder that there is 'perspectives" approval survey posted that has a listing of all the changes if you want to review them. Please make sure you complete that before next Wed. Anyone else want to mention anything before we close the meeting? If you're a RM and have an update, email me and Sharron and we'll add you to rotaition. Thanks and have a great weekend