Re: Questions about Evaluating Web Sites...

Hello Chuck,

JAWS is unable to read the del element and the configuration that ask JAWS 
to say atribute changes is inoperant with the del visual apperance.

Jean-Marie D'Amour

A 22:07 2002-05-23, Chuck Letourneau a écrit :
>You can view the copy of the "Evaluating Web Sites for Accessibility" 
>draft that I captured for editing at: http://www.starlingweb.com/wai/eval1.htm
>In some places I have used the del element of HTML to show replaced text. 
>If this is annoying (or inaccessible) I will remove it. I have not 
>highlighted new text.
>
>I have started working from the change log entries 
>[http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/impl/changelog.html] for the eval 
>doc.  As I expected, the editing raises further questions.
>
>1. For instance, I made the changes for the edit suggested by this entry 
>in the change log:
>         3.2.2 more diversity in tool examples [20011022]
>         [20020410] remove the "as above" in comprehensive,  and repeat it 
> explicitly in comprehensive review (re-cite the external ref list);
>
>I think the change (i.e. repeating the list) does improve 
>comprehension.  However, similar constructs (i.e. references to lists in 
>Preliminary Review) appear in 3.3.2.1 and 3.3.3.1.  Question: if we 
>explicitly repeat the list of tools/steps for 3.2.2, shouldn't we repeat 
>them for these points as well?
>
>2. Regarding 2.2.3, the change log states
>
>         clarify purpose of changing the font size (2.2.3) [20011030]
>         [20020410] (1) [done/cl/20020523:clarify _will_ the font size 
> change on the screen accordingly; and is the page still usable.
>
>I interpreted the point in this way: "use browser controls to vary 
>font-size: verify that the font size changes on the screen accordingly; 
>and that the page is still usable at larger font sizes."  Comments?
>
>
>3. Regarding 2.2.5:
>
>         questioning what printing page accomplishes (2.2.5) [20011030]
>         [20020412] it is useful for some people, so we will leave this 
> in, however it's not required and you don't have to use it.
>
>My concern isn't with the change log comment (which I agree with). The 
>point currently reads "change the display color to black and white (or 
>print out page on black and white printer) and observe whether color 
>contrast is adequate."
>Question: Isn't black and white (i.e. 2-color) display or printing 
>unrealistic or extreme?  Would this be better as "change the display color 
>to gray-scale (or print out page on a gray-scale printer) and observe 
>whether color contrast is adequate." ?
>
>4. Regarding 2.2.6 - I made the change suggested in the change log:
>
>         clarify without the mouse (2.2.6) [20011030]
>         [20020412] agreed, change to without using the mouse
>
>I think this point has further problems, even after the suggested 
>change.  I think the following wording would improve it: "without using 
>the mouse tab through the links and form controls on a page, making sure 
>that you can access all links and form controls, and that the links 
>clearly indicate what they lead to and form control labels clearly 
>identify their purpose."  Actually, I think the latter part of this point 
>should be a separate bullet... the availability of links and controls is a 
>separate issue from link and label clarity.
>
>Regards,
>Chuck Letourneau
>
>

Jean-Marie D'Amour M.Éd.
Formateur
CAMO pour personnes handicapées
www.camo.qc.ca

Received on Friday, 24 May 2002 07:49:45 UTC