- From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:40:34 -0500
- To: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
EOWG, Please review the following this week and prepare do discuss them at the 2 September teleconference: 1. Requirements and Changelog for "Evaluating Web Accessibility with Users" http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-eval-ut 2. [EARLY CONCEPT DRAFT] Evaluating Web Accessibility with Users: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/users.html Review Notes: * it is an "early concept draft" - meaning it is just a rough outline, unformatted, with incomplete sentences, etc. * to get a quick overview, you can skim the words in bold (<strong> in HTML) * stuff in curly brackets are quotes from another resource to give an idea of what we might say * the content of each point is not representative of the amount we would be covering it - some points that would have a couple sentences have no notes yet, and others where we would only have one sentence already have more information than we would use Review & Discussion Questions: 1. Overall reaction? 2. Does this include the points we want to cover? Is anything missing? 3. Are there things we can cut out of this (in order to make the document shorter)? 4. Are we meeting the needs of the identified audiences? (with in reason, wanting to keep it short!) (Primary audience: Web developers (designers, content authors, etc.) who want to comply with Web accessibility standards; Secondary audiences: decision makers, professional evaluators, and accessibility researchers; Also: usability professionals) 5. What things need to be explained or defined? That is, what do we think most readers won't know and can't figure out easily? 6. How does this organization work? Other thoughts for organization? 7. How does the title work? How is it for translatability? Other thoughts for title? Looking forward to discussion! Best regards, ~ Shawn
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2005 16:41:03 UTC