W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org > September 2016

RE: voice menu systems

From: EA Draffan <ead@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 13:52:38 +0000
To: "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>, public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7181A95B72F5B04C94BEF10CEC91E7963E939AFA@SRV00047.soton.ac.uk>
Would simple symbols along with text provide some extra support?  but I agree that reaching a human is often the best option if it is possible.

Best wishes
E.A.

Mrs E.A. Draffan
WAIS, ECS , University of Southampton
Mobile +44 (0)7976 289103
http://access.ecs.soton.ac.uk<http://access.ecs.soton.ac.uk/>
UK AAATE rep http://www.aaate.net/

http://www.emptech.info<http://www.emptech.info/>

From: lisa.seeman [mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com]
Sent: 25 September 2016 19:00
To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Subject: voice menu systems


Please look at https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/extension/task-completion.html


Our we comfortable with the provision of a conformant alternative user-interaction method, that does not rely on user memorization, may allow this success criterion to be met?

It implies that you can have a text alternative to a complex voice system, and that may leave people who can not read, but can manage simple  speech, excluded?

Should we replace the provision with a provision along the lines of , "providing a simple interaction to reach human help allows this success criterion to be met".

All the best

Lisa Seeman

LinkedIn<http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter<https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>

Received on Monday, 26 September 2016 13:53:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 26 September 2016 13:53:19 UTC