W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: Selecting & Using Software for Web Accessibility

From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 12:11:19 -0600
To: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>, EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF97F70644.608D238A-ON86256B5D.00618936@raleigh.ibm.com >
I agree with Charles's second comment:

>2. I don't think it is correct to say that the ATAG reviews are not
>up-to-date, although they may not be in some cases, and may not be
complete
>reviews. On the other hand I think it is important to point out that these
>reveiws are not intended to be an exhaustive or even a particularly set,
and
>are only done by the group for indicative purposes to help in assessing
the
>group's own work and important directions to take.
>
>In other words the group expects these to be accurate, but not exhaustive
or
>complete.

I also think that the point about whether the review is up to date or not
is in the review page maintained by ATAG, so EO should just point to it
with perhaps a small mention about the purpose that ATAG maintains the
list.

Some additional comments:

a. One page & 3 columns.  The 7 guidelines for ATAG should be moved out of
the introduction and into the checklist.  Some of the other introductory
materials in the later section could be moved into the Into section so the
whole document could be collapsed to one page.  Using a visual one page of
information is key to communicating to the masses.  I believe a 3 column
approach would also be helpful here, that of course transforms gracefully
to a linear mode.

b. More graphics.  Need more graphics or diagrams or something besides so
much text.  EO should be concerned about communications, and pictures are
better to communicate with the masses of non-blind web developers and
managers.  The alt text can and should transform to the text-heavy version.
Besides, the technical stuff is in the guidelines and technique docs and
should not be so "technical looking" in the EO materials.
     - for example; the checklist should look like a checklist, not a
simple numbered list [1]
     - another example; use the ATAG icons for types of authoring tools [2]

[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/impl/software4#venqu
[2] http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/sources/techimages/icons/
[3] checklist formatted in a table
http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10/atag10-chktable.html

Regards,
Phill Jenkins,  (512) 838-4517
IBM Research Division - Accessibility Center
Received on Monday, 11 February 2002 13:11:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:49 UTC