Ver 6/16/2011 11:55 AM
UDAC Minutes – 6-15-2011
The Committee on Universal Design and Accessibility (UDAC)
(for campus communications & computing)
A sub-committee of the Chancellors’ Advisory Committee on Program Access
C4C conference room (N215), 2:00 – 3:30
1. Howard’s funding to lead the committee ends in November. May need support letters to ensure
the committee continues
a. Reach out to contest winners and others who might have an interest in supporting
b. ASSETT may be able to put some weight behind this
2. Branding Graphics Discussion
a. Cath notes that .pngs for header are fuzzy when magnified
b. Why PNG rather than GIF? PNG has better quality.
c. Possible to provide an Illustrator file of the web branding?
i. EPSs available for print branding
d. Ideally, the text would be independent of the graphics, but the licensing scheme for the
font is convoluted, and still being worked on.
3. Suggestions for the WebComm guidelines
a. (currently: http://www.colorado.edu/webcom/access/, put up in 2001, but lots of
references to outside sources to future-proof)
b. Content on OSU site is good: http://ada.osu.edu/resources/WebPolicies.htm
c. Suggested purpose statements templated from OSU and Michigan State are on the back
of the agenda.
d. Policy vs. guidelines: would like to push toward Policy.
e. Statement required to be on websites to contact an ADA coordinator-like position if
unable to read the page?
i. Could be problematic: that address may get unrelated questions.
ii. Nonetheless, might be good to have that sort of accountability
iii. Optimal set-up would be to have the email go out to both the local web master
and a third party, such as ADA coordinator or perhaps UDAC itself.
1. Technical aspect of no. 3 may be difficult but possible. Could send it
through a filter(?) that would route it to 2 locations.
f. Have dates before which guidelines have to be implemented, consequences for failure
to do so
i. Some related how university is loath to set deadlines; others felt it was
important to set a deadline –without one, likely that policy or guidelines will be
ignored.
g. Link to relevant law from policy
h. Use WCAG or 508 standards?
i. Using both can be confusing to the user
ii. Crucial to translate technical or law standards into lay-understandable language
1. Examples are helpful in this regard (see OSU guidelines)
Ver 6/16/2011 11:55 AM
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
o.
iii. Maintainability (who and how) will also be important.
1. This should be stated explicitly in the policy and under what time frame
– i.e. how often will the policy and accuracy of the page be reviewed?
2. UDAC itself could be responsible party for maintaining the site with
current content.
Mistakes made with CSU policies:
i. Referring to specific tools, which went out of date
ii. Building in pieces that require funding which never materializes
More weight given to text on a page rather than links, so need to have a mix of both
Consensus(?) on suggested model – 508 guidelines with examples ala the OSU and
Purdue sites, additional links for more info pointing to WCAG and/or 508 tutorials.
i. Will and others felt the examples greatly helped to explain the guidelines.
Cath mentioned how multiple options for training were well received at CSU: i.e. take a
class, train yourself, etc.
UDAC could be a resource for training both as a facilitator – linking campus staff up to
trainings, such as done with recent captioning webinar; committee might consider
option of providing more direct training (to be discussed down the road).
UDAC or subcommittee of UDAC could work with Will and others on a step-by-step
guide (ala CSU site: http://accessibility.colostate.edu/accessweb.htm).
*Look for grants to help fund some of the above activities.
4. Suggestions that may transcend Webcomm guidelines page
a. Create training opportunities on campus for web developers to learn how to follow the
guidelines
b. Create a skillsoft course that’s required for people to be able to develop websites?
i. Would be best as a system policy, rather than just campus-level
ii. *Howard will be sending material to David to get this project started.
iii. Related to i above: require that anyone working on web pages take the skillsoft
course – administered through HR just like other required trainings, such as
ACARD, etc.
5. Development of a Web Accessibility Policy
a. *Howard will discuss with Deb K-F and David with his contact at Office of Policy and
Efficiency, https://www.cu.edu/policies/about.html.
6. Captioning
a. Still looking at some different vendors
i. Automaticsync.com – Very excited to potentially work with CU
b. Lecture capture set up to test out some trials of various captioning
c. Streaming service will likely use:
i. Automatic Sync
ii. 3-play
d. DS to request captioning specifically for classes with affected students for the short
term
i. This puts some people at a disadvantage, and isn’t really universal design
e. Counseling/psych services has some videos already, but hasn’t made them available yet
due to lack of captioning
f. Continuing Ed using student worker using Dragon Naturally Speaking along with free
tools to caption videos
Ver 6/16/2011 11:55 AM
i. Software to slow down speech to half-speed
ii. Also using ScreenCast and Camtasia for captioning process (?).
iii. Cath suggested looking at Magpie; Grant mentioned Movie Captioner looping
tool (latter not free).
g. Need for a captioning tutorial was discussed – perhaps when Cont. Ed. Student returns,
committee could work with him or use his written notes to develop a tutorial.
h. Teachers at Arapahoe Comm. College have a deaf student – they have been captioning a
lot – good resource.
Action items:
o
o
*Will will try to create a draft set of guidelines for the next meeting (maybe?)
*Howard will look at webcomm templates – need to fill out form for access.
Next Meeting Date: July 13th at 2pm, location TBA.