[Accessibility-testing] March 11 call

[Jason McIntosh]

Hi all,

Just a reminder that our next call is scheduled for Tuesday, March 26, at 7 PM Eastern; please join if you can. I’d still like folks to have reviewed the APX guidelines (https://accessible.games/accessible-player-experiences) by then, with a plan to start discussing how these can map to the observations we’ve made and the conclusions we’re reaching towards.

Speaking of reaching, I’d like to have at least a rough and agreed-upon list of recommendations by April 8, and then an agreed-upon report outline (with an associated division of labor) by April 22; that’ll give us about seven weeks thereafter to put the thing together. Does that sound reasonable?

> On Mar 12, 2019, at 11:27 AM, Jason McIntosh <jmac at jmac.org> wrote:
> 
> Present: Austin, Deborah, jmac, Mark, Zack
> 
> My reformatting the survey responses into those textfiles meant that people (myself included!) actually read through em all before the meeting and had them fresh in mind; I’m only sorry I didn’t do it sooner! We had an engaging 45-minute chat.
> 
> One possible attitudinal framing for our report is that of a *community challenge* (beyond merely “here’s some stuff we found”). Lay out the benefits of making increased baseline accessibility not just a nice thing to have, but *the norm*. (Conider recommending that creation tools mark up a lack of bare-minimum accessibility metadata as a compile-time warning!) Mark quotes an AbleGamers line: Don’t you *want* more people to play your game?
> 
> Some homework that I’d like to give everyone, myself included: please read AbleGamer’s “APX” guidelines for game developers. (https://accessible.games/accessible-player-experiences/) I’d like to ground our report in this extensively researched work that Mark and his colleagues have already accomplished. Mark said during our discussion that pretty much every positive suggestion or observation we have discovered maps to an APX accessibility-improvement pattern. (The one I had in mind going in was “second channel”, which recommends presenting important information to two senses, such as both displayed text and a meaningful sound effect.)
> 
> I am feeling bullish about the idea of completing this report in time for Narrascope — almost exactly three months away from today. I want to encourage y’all to read the reformatted responses (if you haven’t already), read my outlined reaction to them (posted to the list yesterday), and then browse the APX guidelines. Please do share any further thoughts this may engender to the list. At any rate, I wish to start synthesizing all this into a report-creation plan prior to our next chat.
> 
> Our next chat is scheduled for 7 PM Eastern on Tuesday, March 18. (Couldn’t do Monday due to personal travel plans.)
> 
>> On Mar 11, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Jason McIntosh <jmac at jmac.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi folks,
>> 
>> Our biweekly call is tonight at 7 PM Eastern. (I plan to not forget this time…)
>> 
>> Main topic will be starting to plan the report. If you’re planning to attend, please take some time to read the “remixed” survey-response data documents I shared with the list on March 6 (and also placed in the dropbox, under “twine_responses.txt” and “inform_responses.txt”. I’d like to propose treating these (perhaps as a bit of cleanup) as the working data we’ll base the report on, to include this data itself as an appendix.
>> 
>> I’m taking some time now to work up some preliminary observations and recommendations based on this data, as well as Deborah and Austin’s earlier written reactions to it.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility-testing mailing list
> Accessibility-testing at iftechfoundation.org
> https://iftechfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-testing