W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-evaltf@w3.org > December 2011

Re: updated draft Methodology for your review

From: RichardWarren <richard.warren@userite.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 12:22:54 -0000
Message-ID: <037EF6A7F7534742BA8584025AF388BE@DaddyPC>
To: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>, "Eval TF" <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Dear Shadi,

I am afraid that I will not be able to attend the whole meeting today as I 
have an unavoidable appointment at  3:30.
I like the improvements to the draft, but have a few comments.

The second sentence in section 3 (Procedure to express scope) starts with 
the word "On" instead of "One".

With regard to scope I feel that key functions (3.4) should come before 
Complete Process (3.3) as all key functions (by definition) are important, 
whereas it is possible that a complete process (such as a promotional game) 
might not be.

The wording of the first sentence in 3.6 (Authorisation) should be changed 
to passive voice such as "A user needs to go through an authorisation 
process.."

User testing. In section 2 (Expertise Required) we say that user testing is 
"strongly recommended" but in section 5.1 (Manual and machine evaluation) 
the third paragraph is not so strong. I think we need something more here in 
5.1 to re-enforce our desire that user testing is included, OR that the 
evaluation includes the use of, or simulation of, AT such as screen readers.

Barrier recognition (5.4) will be an important element of the evaluation and 
(I think) should be defined BEFORE we provide a "step by step" description 
in 5.3 (Procedure for evaluation). I also think that we will need to clearly 
define the difference between a barrier (such as a keyboard trap) that 
prevents progress and something else that is an inconvenience, i.e. it 
requires additional steps for an AT user.

Richard


-----Original Message----- 
From: Shadi Abou-Zahra
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 8:27 AM
To: Eval TF
Subject: updated draft Methodology for your review

Dear Group,

Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20111207>

Please find the updated draft Methodology document from Eric that
incorporates the comments received so far.

Regards,
   Shadi

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
Research and Development Working Group (RDWG) 
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2011 12:23:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:52:12 GMT