W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-age@w3.org > October to December 2008

Re: Feedback Before-After Demo

From: Michael Stenitzer <stenitzer@wienfluss.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:06:19 +0200
Message-ID: <48F5DCBB.6080604@wienfluss.net>
To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
CC: public-wai-age@w3.org

hi shadi,

Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> 
> Thank you for your comments. Many of these are about the coding so let's 
> discuss them when we implement the changes. For now, we need to identify 
> any functional changes to the Demo that would better highlight that WCAG 
>  also improves the user experience for older people.
> 
> Do you have specific thoughts about the types of accessibility barriers 
> that we should further include in the Demo?
> 

most of my comments are about barriers relevant to older users and / or 
users with disabilities. and i think those are mostly the soft issues 
which are very typical problems for websites. i also think those soft 
issues have often an impact on the usability for older users.

a few further ideas:

* include links which are not clearly identifyable as links.
* include items which look like links and are not (we already have the 
teaser images being not clickable)
* forms with missing / unclear error-messages
* unclear date and time

hope that helps, michael

> Regards,
>   Shadi
> 
> 
> Michael Stenitzer wrote:
>>
>> dear all,
>>
>> a bit late my additional comments on the before and after demo
>> (no claim to be complete):
>>
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/index
>>
>> * teasers in right column: link the headline, make the whole teaser
>>   clickable with progressive enhancement techniques, inkl. hover-effects
>>   (CSS,JS)
>>
>>   rationale:
>>   - increase clickable areas.
>>   - make areas clickable that might be expected to be links.
>>   - indicate clickability with visual effects.
>>
>> * drop-down nav in the header (quick menu):
>>   rationale: i don't see any reason for this. it is a mere duplication
>>   of the main navigation and needs much more fine motor skills (and
>>   clicks) than ordinary links. it actually hides information instead of
>>   providing additional link opportunities.
>>
>>   if you want to show an accessible drop-down-menu make it more useful:
>>   different links, more links (thats actually the reason why we use
>>   those items), consider a collapsed UL with progressive enhancement or
>>   eg. make the quicknav a ordinary list of links and place it somewhere
>>   else, eg. in the footer like many websites do it nowadays.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/info
>>
>> * increase / improve use of whitespace
>>   rationale: distinction of unrelated information. increase readability.
>>
>>   eg. around the table in the bottom,
>>   before and after the headings - some are closer to the previous
>>   paragraphs than to the next ones.
>>
>>   the image boxes are positioned in a way that it is visually not clear
>>   that they belong to the regarding sections. (they are wrongly aligned,
>>   at least in firefox)
>>
>>
>> * improve legibility of copy. split into several paragraphs and maybe
>>   use lists.
>>
>>   rationale: increase readability and scan-ability of text.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/data
>>
>> * reorder page structure for better understanding of the page.
>>   split Frank Zappa and Thelonius Mank (nice selection, BTW!) into
>>   separate sections.
>>
>> * increase whitespace, do not use nested lists inline but make them real
>>   nested lists (in the T&C section)
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/form
>>
>> * link logo to the home
>>
>> * link the teaser images in a consistent manner (compared to home)
>>
>> * reconsider LEGEND elements' length
>>   rationale: screenreaders will read the legend with every label in the
>>   fieldset. is might be annoying.
>>
>> * consider using a visually more unobstrusive but still accessible
>>   technique.
>>
>> * consider increasing size of comment-box
>>   use a textarea for "other reason"?
>>
>> * reconsider text and form of "Rank your favourite forms of
>>   transportation" in section 2.
>>
>>   - i'm not a native speaker, but i think a ranking should bring those
>>     items in an order?
>>
>>   - consider using a different form than drop-downs, maybe radiobuttons
>>     as they are generally easier to use (single click)?
>>
>> * ??? aren't numbers (1,2,3) generally easier to read and understand
>>   than the words (one, two, three). maybe this is only true for bigger
>>   numbers.
>>
>> * increase and visually emphasize the submit button.
>>   i generally have the feeling the a reset button is useless in 99% of
>>   the cases and every useless element should be dropped(TM).
>>
>>
>> * Footer: provide a TITLE for KEIO to indicate what this might be. it's
>>   not that famous among ordinary users ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> gerneral comments on the presentation of BAD:
>>
>> * make a tab-interface for good and bad (would be easier to understand
>>   and to handle)
>>
>> * make a slideshow-like before & next page navigation
>>
>> * make major barriers & improvements toggle-able (whats the right
>>   word?): maybe those comments could be positioned in lightboxes in the
>>   margin?
>>
>> * crosslink barrieres to WCAG and maybe to our comparative analysis
>>
>>
>> i hope that helps for the first,
>> regards, michael
>>
> 


-- 
Michael Stenitzer | WIENFLUSS information.design.solutions
www.wienfluss.net | proschkogasse 1/5 | vienna AT
fon ++43 650 9358770 | fax ++43 1 23680199
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2008 12:06:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:50:20 UTC