Thursday, August 16, 2007 Meeting Minutes

Announcements:

Web Manager University
Of particular note: Gerry McGovern's September 18 webinar, " Customer Carewords: Using a Three-Step Process to Deliver Top Tasks,", is free to government employees. Register on webcontent.gov.

Topic: Open Mic—Questions from Forum Members

Instructions for Open Mic session:

We'll proceed as we do during Q&A sessions.
Do you have a situation that others might have to deal with?
Remember to place your phone on mute if you have to step away.
We will take note of questions that we can't answer on this call and send to the Forum Listerv, to see if one of our members who couldn't attend the call can respond.

Question: Who's on the call? Can people introduce themselves?

Response: Several folks announce their name and agency.

Questions about using Web 2.0 technologies on government websites.

Has anyone broached using a Google or Yahoo group? What are the security and accessibility issues, disclaimers, third-party posting issues?
On the listserv there's been a lot of discussion on Flickr, YouTube. I am interested in knowing about technology, but have not seen agreed-upon standards for using those technologies. Must be a host of issues government agencies face using these technologies. I'd like to see someone take lead on standards, policy, and legal issues for using these technologies.

Responses:

Two challenges with discussion threads. You need trusted identity management and you need to authenticate external partners. These are issues with any collaborative technology, including usability and collaboration with nongovernment, when there is no trust partnership.
Flash is not 508 compliant. 508 has to be primary focus when considering these technologies.
There are a range of security and 508 issues to consider with new technology. We need to start thinking about these issues.

Questions about policies:

Is there a policy working group? I know there are a lot of advisory groups. Is there one focused on policy?
It's not technical barriers, its issues with law that restrain the ability to effectively communicate. Privacy, Section 508, not using a .gov domain, advertisements, endorsements. It's really the policy that holds government back from using new technology.

Responses:

The Forum's Technology Task Group is working now to develop best practices for some of these new technologies, and there are several other groups, including some who work on policy issues.
If you are interested in working with the technology group to help us develop some best practices around these new technologies, please contact the Technology Task Group leader, Rezaur Rahman.
To learn more about the Technology Task Group, or any of our other task groups, please visit Webcontent.gov. Read our Strategic Plan to see the list of all task groups, and find contact information for the task group leaders.

Question: I'm a new caller. Is the group generally more about technology? We have a program with Portugal. Does anyone have experience with international technology? There are cultural aspects of collaborative technology like wikis. Are others working with this issue?

Response: Try the Federal Multilingual Websites Committee, the group's leader is Leilani Martinez. They might be able to provide some assistance both with communicating with people in other countries, and also with cultural sensitivity issues. It's a matter of resources. There are many new and refined Limited English Proficience (LEP) policies.

Question: Issue with ACSI customer satisfaction survey on pages with content geared to children. It may not be appropriate to ask under-age school children to fill out the survey. Has anyone else had that problem?

Responses:

That's true under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ( COPPA)—we say, if visitors are under 13, please don't fill out this form (but for some kids, that make them want to fill it out even more!)
Todd Dickey at FTC: We just updated the COPPA page on FTC.gov. We're responsible for the act. Get in touch with me, Todd Dickey.

Question: We just rolled out SharePoint at HUD. How do you use SharePoint? Are you using it? Are there crossovers between SharePoint and intranet? How do you deal with the two environments? Is there a need for traditional intranet when you have a SharePoint-like tool? Or should SharePoint function as the “development” environment, and your intranet be the place you publish “final” versions, the “production” environment?

Responses:

People use it to invite others into meetings and others who are not in the same division. For example, we invited nurses from other hospitals into a discussion. Issue an open invitation, there are a limited number of invitations you can send out to eliminate spamming.
We used an early version of SharePoint. Really is true Enterprise Content Management (ECM) system. Transforms how work teams work together. SharePoint is well integrated in other collaborative applications. Legacy, portal technology use SharePoint for integration.
SharePoint supports work flow both for documents and web content management workflow. For true work flow process, you should have specific content and know which audiences you have to work with. Identify roles with collaborative work space, you must understand the business process involved in your work.
We're in the beginning stages of using it, we use it for calendar. It's very helpful, we have lots of ideas of new ways to use it.

Question: Did anyone read that story about the quiet death of the major relaunch? What did you think? (Note: wholesale redesign means totally revamping site, and incremental redesign means only changing small parts of the site, a bit at a time.)

Response: NASA is knee-deep in an actual relaunch. Two things. A major overhaul of content at the top level makes more sense to users. We also hope to add new features like search, Web 2.0, blogs, poll, and user comments. No sense keeping the same graphical interface when so much of the substance of our site is changing. We're trying to follow Yahoo's example and release new features in bits and pieces. For example, we give folks an option to "See this story in the new look and feel." Don't know if the major overhaul is dead. There is value in trial runs and Management likes to put it's own stamp on websites. We're testing in four weeks.

Our regular customer satisfaction scores were flat. With this redesign, we're trying to keep loyal followers and help people find content, just changing the presentation. Providing a little advance preview about the roll out makes it easier to use for loyal visitors.

Question: Any ideas why it might not be good to redesign a site?

Responses:

It will affect some current users negatively if they have to change the way they find info. Ask the question, weigh the impact on your business case. Consider the short term user consequences. New design might not be any better than old design.
That's why metrics is important. Look at your numbers. Is there a real need to improve search, navigation? Old users will have learning curve. A roll out plan is really important.
You must measure success after roll out. Must have baseline before beginning redesign. Sometimes have to do a redesign because of political appointees.
Ask yourself why are we doing this, what can we expect. Refocus of your website's mission after restructure will affect the information and services you can provide to customers. Usability is as important as metrics. What other services are you providing? Review aspects of site that are not currently being used. IRS is now one of top ten in usability.

Question: Let's discuss wikipedia.

Responses:

DHS has had success posting information there. Look at disclaimers and "rules" for posting on the site. Are you the source? What are your restrictions? If you use it like a business space and toot your own horn, that is frowned upon, but if you provide “official” info from government organization, they like that.
Create a password and put in some good information, if you are interested in getting your agency info on Wikipedia. May be good for others in the web content community to get into.
Wikipedia is always in the top Google links.
Entries should only be definitions—here's who we are and what we do. Do NOT promote. Be very wary with what you post in your official capacity.
Before you post anything, be sure to review all pertinent Wikipedia policies including, but not limited to:
- How do I add a page about myself, or my site, company or organization?
- Neutral point of view

Question: Will the Forum be using Web 2.0 technology so we can try these technologies?

Response: Technology group is working on this.

Question: Is anyone working on other sites like Wiktionary? What are other Wikipedia projects? Does anyone else have experience contributing content?

Response: Wikipedia says you can give a brief description at the federal level, and link to your website for specific types of information. Create links "go here for more information." When you get into creating pages, there can be credibility issues.

Question: We need the Forum to look at this. What federal guidelines apply? What needs to be done? Government would be a good catalyst for getting good terminology on Wikipedia. Read the conflict of interest policy to participate before working.

Response: Suggest you raise these issues with you agency's legal counsel.

Wrap up: Thanks to all the participants on the call.

If you have ideas on how to make the Forum calls better, or suggestions for topics, please send to Rachel (rachel.flagg@hud.gov) or Sheila (sheila.campbell@gsa.gov).

Next call: Thursday, September 20, 11 am ET

Page Updated or Reviewed: January 3, 2008