W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > March 2009

Re: [questionnaire] Addendum to Mobile Web Best Practices ready for publication?

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 10:13:07 +0100
Message-ID: <49AF97A3.6050009@technosite.es>
To: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG <public-bpwg@w3.org>
By the way, people should read Kai's replies to my comments by the way 
(especially Jo and Dom where mentioned specifically).



Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich escribió:
> Hi Alan,
> 
> Thank for you input.  That great stuff.
> I will put my responses in the text and hope to see some other feedback
> on Alan's points....
> 
> -- Kai
> 
>  
> +Generally
> 
> * Mark up the table of contents as a real UL list (without the BR line
> breaks).
> 
> -- sure.  Thought this was already the case, but haven't looked in a
> while.
> 
> 
> * The section for each BP "Relevant device properties" needs some
> explanation. I understand that this means properties that can be
> detected on the server. This is covered in the BP document under "3.5
> Establishing Context" [4].
> 
> -- Dom had suggested putting this in and I think his intention was
> different.
>    Dom?
> 
> 
> * I think that references should be marked in the text
> [REFERENCE_HANDLE] with a link to the  section at the end of the page.
> 
> -- Yes. Also, as Francois pointed out the Ref section needs to be
> formatted as well.
> 
> 
> +1.1 Purpose
> 
> * "Mobile Web Best Practices contains sections against each best
> practice" might be better written as "Each of the Mobile Web Best
> Practices contains a section called "What to Test".
> 
> * The preceding isn't really about the purpose of the document, but I
> can't see where else it fits in.
> 
> -- I think this came from Jo, so I would like to see what he thinks.
>    Also, we don't want to say "test".
>    Jo?
> 
> 
> * Missing space in "evaluationsin".
> 
> -- Ok
> 
> 
> +1.2 Relationship to mobileOK Basic Tests
> 
> * The second paragraph ("Many of the tests described in mobileOK Basic
> Tests are...") is useful, and is an addendum to MWBP, but I don't think
> it belongs in this section as many of the tests described in this
> document are not useful when determining suitability of content for use
> on more advanced devices either. It's more a general comment on MWBP as
> a whole.
> 
> -- Group feedback?
> 
> * "completes the set of Best Practices" perhaps better as "completes the
> set of tests for the Best Practices"
> 
> -- Here too, shouldn't use "test".
>    Group feedback to Alan's point?
> 
> 
> +2.1 Evaluation Scope
> 
> It might be useful to cite the Web content Accessibility Guidelines (now
> a W3C Recommendation), the section about conformance that has two
> clauses "Full pages" and "Complete processes." These are not specific to
> accessibility and apply equally well to MWBP. So we should mention them
> I think. In fact, just below it the item "A concise description of the
> Web pages" is also relevant.
> 
> -- Since we are not asking for conformance, this might be a bit too
> strong.
>    Group feedback?
> 
> 
> +3.4 Background Image readability
> 
> The Example should perhaps be an image (remembering
> STYLE_SHEETS_SUPPORT). Without CSS it is black on white.
> 
> The WCAG 2.0 Techniques [2] give a list of tools to check this,
> including one developed especially for WCAG 2.0.  I think that the
> Ishihara Test for Color Blindness isn't very useful as it consists of
> very specific examples. If people aren't using exactly those colours it
> won't help them.
> 
> WCAG success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) [3] gives a definition,
> and exceptions to this which might be worth mentioning.
> 
> -- I disagree on using a picture as this is a test for contrast.  White
> on black is a good way to demonstrate this.
>    I am not aware of the Ishihara Test for Color Blindness being limited
> to colors, but rather to contrast levels of two adjascent colors.
>    Either way it demonstrate very well what this point is about.
>    However we could certainly refer to more tools to check this issue.
> 
> 
> 
> +3.5 Balance
> 
> Under "Relevant device properties: Support for non-linear navigation
> across links" I didn't understand this until I read the rest of the
> section. Perhaps "non-sequential" or "skipping/jumping links" might be
> clearer.
> 
> -- Ok, I'll look at it, to make it clearer.
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#conformance-reqs
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/G18
> [3]
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-con
> trast
> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#d0e437
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Alan Chuter
Departamento de Usabilidad y Accesibilidad
Consultor
Technosite - Grupo Fundosa
Fundación ONCE
Tfno.: 91 121 03 30
Fax: 91 375 70 51
achuter@technosite.es
http://www.technosite.es
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 09:15:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:00 UTC