W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > October to December 2006

Answers to question in Re: EOWG: Agenda for 6 October 2006 Teleconference

From: Sylvie Duchateau <sylvie.duchateau@snv.jussieu.fr>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 17:08:21 +0200
Message-ID: <200610051708210875.01AE78ED@mail.snv.jussieu.fr>
To: shawn@w3.org, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org

Hello Shawn and all,

I have just read the slides carefully and I will try to answer some of your questions below. 
>1. Components of Web Accessibility: A 10 Minute Tutorial [working title]
>   - Latest version:
>	http://www.w3.org/Talks/wai-components/all.htm
>Questions for your review:
>
>a. Any additional comments overall: How is this version meeting the
>requirements? Does it contain the right amount of content and detail? How
>is the tone?

I cannot say much about the tone and the requiremeent meeting, but there are some suggestions below. 
- Clearly identify what are the components of Web accessibility in a list, how many are they and which are they. 
- while reading from slide 7 on, I don't understand why "alt text example" has been chosen. Maybe a sentence should explain that text equivalent for images is important for the accessibility of a Web site and for that reason, the "alt text example" has been chosen to illustrate each slide. 

>
>b. Any comments on edits from last week? Particularly:
>- the first page/slide
>- the new one 17 "Accessibility Support Example"
Slide 17 is helpful. 
May be another slide could be added illustrating another situation. 

>c. How do we want to differentiate the Alt text example bullets? Some
>options:
>i. <code> alt: prototyped in 7 "Web Content with Alt Text"
May be useful for people reading in text-only but not for others. And maybe only useful for people knowing HTML language. Not for newbies. 

>ii. <strong> alt text example: prototyped in 8 "Browsers Getting Web
>Content"

After asking one colleague, strong is the most obvious way of presenting alt text example. 
>iii. <em>(italic) alt text example: prototyped in 9 "Assistive
>Technologies Getting Web Content"

Not easy to read. I think I remember that some people can't stand reading italics. 

>iv. parenthesis around all: prototyped in 10 "Users Getting Web Content"

Not helpful. 

>v. nothing: prototyped in 11 "Developers Creating Web Content"
Would not help distinguishing the example. 

>vi. other?

Combining strong and code? 

>d. What do we call this and others like it?
>The last 2 weeks we came up with title ideas and agreed to think more
>about it. We have tried:
>- Components of Web Accessibility: A 10-Minute Tutorial
>- Components of Web Accessibility: Mini-Tutorial
>- Components of Web Accessibility: A Walk-Through
>There is still some concern about "10 Minute Tutorial" as it may take some
>people longer, especially some people with disabilities. Other ideas that
>we have had are in the 15 & 22 Sept minutes linked to from
><http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-components-self.html#refs >
I'm not in favour of 10 minutes tutorial, as many people may need longer to read the slides as you already pointed out. 
If we don't find anything better I still prefer "mini tutorial". 

Regards
Sylvie
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2006 15:03:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:42 GMT