Child pages
  • Accessibility WG Teleconference Minutes 12-17-2009
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Sakai Accessibility Usability Teleconference Minutes from December 17, 2009

These notes were taken by Mary Stores.


  • Sean Keegan - Stanford
  • Joe Humbert - Indiana University, Purdue University Indianapolis
  • Mary Stores - Indiana University Bloomington
  • Margaret Londergan - Indiana University Bloomington
  • Brian Richwine, conference chair - Indiana University Bloomington

Proposed Accessibility Statement

The proposed accessibility statement as sent out to the group's email list was discussed. Mike Elledge, Joe Humbert, and Mary Stores prefer the 2nd paragraph alternate so it was adopted.

Concerns over the accessibility statement:

  • Audience. People who would be interested in the accessibility statement would include those having accessibility issues with a tool or the site.
    • Because of this, there is a need for contact info in case of accessibility concerns and documentation concerning how best to navigate/use Sakai.
    • There is also a need for a link that points to current accessibility results and a list of accessible and inaccessible tools.
  • The purpose of the statement is to enforce that this is something that the Sakai community takes seriously.
  • A gateway page should be created that goes to all that is listed above plus developer guidelines.

The accessibility compliance goals as found in the statement were discussed.

  • Level A success would be the baseline, but where possible, AAA would be met
  • W3C guidelines would include/cover most other international standards.
    • Most of the world uses WCAG, and some countries might have adopted WCAG and then created their own standards like Sec. 508 and WCAG.
    • Since WCAG 2.0 is so internationalized and so many countries are already using WCAG 1.0, it would be best to stick with meeting WCAG 2.0.
  • Sean feels the other accessibility documentation this group will produce is more important than the accessibility statement because it will back up the statement, though the statement is right on track.

Reasons for why adoption of accessibility issues in Sakai has been hindered was discussed.

  • Increased education and outreach is needed.
  • Because Sakai is an enterprise level platform, accessibility is important. The fact that Eli is supportive of accessibility and keeping it as a core issue will help.

Development activities where accessibility could be addressed were discussed.

  • Brian found accessibility mentioned in the "Sakai 3 UX Development Guidelines and Information" document, and in other development documents on confluence. In the Sakai 3 UX Development Guidelines document there is an accessibility section that says Sakai doesn't have a good set of accessibility guidelines and that it goes on to list the BBC guidelines and mentions the need for further discussion.
  • There is also a user interface library where code is being put up showing what widgets, search fields and other thing would look like.
    • Some of the design is accessible, but some of it is inaccessible due to lack of labeled form elements, incorrect use of labeling, other coding errors, etc.
    • Because of this and the volume of info coming from the user experience group, maybe Eli could appoint Brian or someone from accessibility group to talk to head of user experience group for Sakai 3; Eli would be the logical choice for the role, but if he cannot, this would be an alternative.
  • Sean will follow up with Kelly Amman to see who the core person of the user experience group is.