SWG-A AdHoc#14 report

The scope of ToR for AdHoc #14 was:
Ad Hoc 14 is established to consider updates to the User Needs Summary (ISO/IEC TR 29138 Information technology - Accessibility considerations for people with disabilities - Part 1: User needs summary) and to conduct research to identify areas where voluntary standards are not being addressed and suggest an appropriate body to consider the new work. Ad Hoc 14 Leader: Mr. Erlend Øverby (Norway). Participants: Dr. Hajime Yamada (Japan), Mr. Andy Heath (UK), Ms. Judy Brewer (W3C/WAI), Mr. Ken Salaets (ITI), Ms. Helle Bjarnø (Denmark) and Ms. Andi Snow-Weaver (US).

This is a short report based on several meetings conducted the last year.

Meetings

• AdHoc #14 have tried to arrange several on line meetings using FlashMeeting (http://fm.ea-tel.eu/about.html) or Skype. However the members of AdHoc#14 are busy people so we have never managed to have complete attendance, this has had some effect on the progression of the work.
• 4 meetings have been held, and they are documented at the Confluence wiki http://wiki.teria.no/display/swga14/

Conclusion

• There is a need for revising the User Needs Summary in ISO/IEC TR 29138-1, this work should be done in a face 2 face meeting with more people attending.
• We should ask the users of ISO/IEC 29138-1 about feedback on the readability and organization of the document. We think readability could be improved by providing several alternative organizations of the document. However this need to be discussed during the London meeting.
• We should survey the users of ISO/IEC TR29138-1 about the applicability of the user needs, and if other user needs have been identified in using the document.
• An alternative organization of the User Needs Summary document, could improve the readability and understanding of the document.
• <andi> I don't think we have reached the conclusion that there is a need for revising the User Needs Summary. We have been discussing whether or not a different organization might improve the readability and understanding of the document. But we have never discussed a specific proposal for a different organization. Before we could conclude that this is necessary, I believe we need to solicit feedback from people who have used it (ITU? ETSI STF 333? others?). Did they have problems? Do they have suggestions for improvements? If they didn't have any serious problems with it, then it may not be worth the effort required to revise it just because we think it could be organized better. As far as the content goes, we have one contribution proposing some additional user needs. But we have not yet discussed it to determine if these are in fact additional needs that should be added. </andi>
  <erlend>I agree - we should survey the users and ask for comments, and suggestion for improvements</erlend>

Recommendation

• If there is a SWG-A meeting in Paris;France in September 2011, time should be allocated to work on the User Needs summary.
  • A plan for collecting potential input should be put forward in due time to this meeting, and a survey of ISO/IEC 29138-1 users should be performed. The results from this survey should be discussed and processed at the Paris meeting.
• The document should be provided with several different alternative representation for increased readability and understanding of the document. We need to discuss how to best organize the document. <andi> Do you mean that we should explore several alternative proposals for organization of the document or that the TR itself should allow for several different presentations? </andi>
  <erlend>I was thinking to allow for different presentations, of the same content.</erlend>

Sincerely;

Erlend Øverby
AdHoc 14 leader