W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2003

Lists in normative section

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 00:16:26 -0600
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-id: <002e01c2bdef$f7ac8ff0$056fa8c0@TOSHIBATABLET>
Couple of problems in the way we were thinking of doing 4.1


Problem 1:  If we create a list of things to review against and put it into
normative section, then we cannot add to the list.   So are we saying that
those things are the ONLY things that make content simpler to understand-and
that they do not need to consider anything else?     We can't sat  etc. on
the list to indicate that there may be more because then the success
criteria stops being testable (since we are requiring that they review
against a list that we don't provide them all of.



Problem 2:  In trying to create a list of individual items, I kept running
into the problem that they looked like success criteria.  Even if we start
off with a sentence which simply says, "You must think about the following
things," if the list that follows reads like:


*        One idea per sentence

*        Words are familiar to intended audience

*        Etc.


The items end up looking not like suggestions, but success criteria.  I
tried rewording them as questions, but they, again, ended up looking like
success criteria.


*        Is there only one idea per paragraph?

*        Are the words and structures familiar to the intended audience?

*        Etc.


If we release a set of guidelines in this form with a bulleted list of items
in the "success criteria" area, I'm afraid it will be widely misunderstood
and misconstrued to be a list of criteria.  I would be willing to bet
anybody a very large amount of money that we will immediately see test tools
which try to (if they possibly could) test compliance by testing each of
these questions rather than testing the "did you do a review".


The only thing I can think we might do about this is to go back to the
original plan which simply had the requirement for review up above and
sample lists of things to review below.


Or maybe make them very clearly general things to be looked at and not
specific things to be achieved.  


Not sure how to do that.


Sorry to post a problem with no suggested solution.




 -- ------------------------------ 

(Same Email and Phone)
Trace R & D Center
2107 Engineering Centers Bldg.
1550 Engineering Drive
MADISON, WI    53706


Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Human Factors 
Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
Gv@trace.wisc.edu < <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu> mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <
<http://trace.wisc.edu/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> 
FAX 608/262-8848  
For a list of our listserves send "lists" to listproc@trace.wisc.edu <
<mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu> mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu> 

Received on Friday, 17 January 2003 01:16:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:43 UTC