RE: 'Usable Accessibility"

Just my three cents worth.

I have no problem creating usability supplemental information for WCAG however, there is nice to have and have to have, and frankly we need to get people to meet even (AA) WCAG conformance which can be done in a nicely usable system or not.  When we get to (AAA) conformance we may find some more specifically scoped requirements that could possibly appear to be usability issues as well.  But, as someone who uses a screen reader I can say that I am happy to have a terrible system to learn that is accessible than a great system to learn that isn't accessible.  I can't even try and learn the inaccessible system, while a less-than usable system I can ask questions from others and learn what to do even if its annoying.  So, in a nutshell, I'd be fine with doing some work on applying usability to WCAG's work as is, but am fine with leaving it separate for now as well.



Allen Hoffman
Deputy Executive Director
The Office of Accessible Systems & Technology
Department of Homeland Security
202-447-0503 (voice)
allen.hoffman@hq.dhs.gov

DHS Accessibility Helpdesk
202-447-0440 (voice)
202-447-0582 (fax)
202-447-5857 (TTY)
accessibility@dhs.gov
 
This communication, along with any attachments, is covered by federal and state law governing electronic communications and may contain sensitive and legally privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please reply immediately to the sender and delete this message.  Thank you.


-----Original Message-----
From: Laura Carlson [mailto:laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2015 11:58 AM
To: Josh CFIT; Mike Elledge; Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com; David MacDonald; GLWAI Guidelines WG org
Subject: Re: 'Usable Accessibility"

Hi Mike, Michael, Josh, David, and all,

Thank you for the great discussion!

Mike, Yes. Usable accessibility may be a good place to start. Checking
out usability design patterns from Apple etc, is a great idea.

Michael, I agree that scope is a concern. Giving top-level guidance on
the importance of continuous usability testing during development and
then provide links to other standards would be a good thing.

David, Thanks. My thought is that it can't hurt to explore ideas on
the usability topic. What got me interested in all of this was reading
and reviewing two studies for the "WCAG Issues Sorted Page" that were
very critical of WCAG for not addressing usability or providing a
framework, etc. So I read more studies and they concurred. If we could
turn that around and get more usability people embracing WCAG that
would be a good thing. Maybe even get them to help with the workload
and provide thier expertise. With respect to current WG participants,
are we all required to contribute a minimum of 4 hours a week?

Josh, I agree that we should think carefully before dismissing
usability. To that point, legal settlement agreements are
incorporating usability into their definition of accessibility. The 2
areas are interwined in that respect too.

Kindest Regards,
Laura

On 7/8/15, Josh CFIT <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie> wrote:
> Thanks for that Mike. I certainly understand working group members
> hesitancy and skepticism about
> this kind of work for a group like WCAG. Some may even outright dismiss
> usability/user experience as merely 'subjective'. But to do so to my
> mind, is to knowingly or not, deny the reality of subjective experience
> - which I don't think is a good logical or philosophical basis, either
> to not do this kind of work, or as an argument to just not try.
>
> For another angle, my own 2 cents is that I don't think modern
> technology standards can afford to (or rather would prefer that they
> didn't) divorce themselves from the user experience. Or put another way,
> to put themselves at such a remove that they somehow abdicate
> responsibility for that experience.
>
> _How_ we do that, at this point, I just don't know - but at the very
> least think a TF of this nature can explore if this line of thinking is
> worthwhile and we may come up with some interesting deltas with other
> standards/guidelines. If nothing else, doing this work would help to put
> user centered design, usability, etc on the map and act as great
> awareness raising propaganda.
>
> I'm also fully aware that we get this more wrong than right - but in
> toto I guess it's worth a shot.
>
> Thanks
>
> Josh
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Michael Pluke" <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
> To: "David MacDonald" <david100@sympatico.ca>; "Joshue O Connor"
> <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
> Cc: "Loretta Guarino Reid" <lorettaguarino@google.com>; "Gregg
> Vanderheiden" <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>; "Laura Carlson"
> <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>; "GLWAI Guidelines WG org"
> <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; "Katie Haritos-Shea" <ryladog@gmail.com>; "Shadi
> Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>; "Debra Ruh Global" <debra@ruhglobal.com>;
> "Dick" <wayneedick@gmail.com>; "Neil Milliken"
> <Neil.Milliken@bbc.co.uk>; "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> Sent: 08/07/2015 08:55:11
> Subject: RE: '"Usable Accessibility'" TF VS. Higher education
>
>>Hi all
>>
>>
>>
>>I fully agree with David’s scepticism about the idea that W3C should
>>create a task force on “UX intersecting wit a11y” unless it’s scope is
>>seriously limited (e.g. along the lines of my last paragraph).
>>
>>
>>
>>More than a quarter of a century ago I started working in the field of
>>usability standards and am aware of the hundreds of person years of
>>effort that have gone into their development. It is difficult to see
>>how W3C could hope to replicate the enormous amount of expertise that
>>has gone into the development of these standards – and in particular
>>the granddaddy of them all ISO-9241 (which I played a small part in
>>developing in its early days). An old colleague of mine has written a
>>guide to this comprehensive multi-part standard that is still being
>>revised and expanded and an out-of-date version of this guide is
>>available online (and also lists many other relevant standards) [1].
>>
>>
>>
>>Given that I suspect that we all recognise and are concerned about the
>>"Accessibility Lipstick on a Usability Pig" issue, maybe W3C should
>>consider how it might be able to give top-level guidance on the
>>importance of continuous usability testing during development and then
>>provide links to important standards, like ISO-9241, that should be
>>consulted during that development.
>>
>>
>>
>>Best regards
>>
>>
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
>>Sent: 07 July 2015 17:48
>>To: Joshue O Connor
>>Cc: Loretta Guarino Reid; Gregg Vanderheiden; Laura Carlson; GLWAI
>>Guidelines WG org; Katie Haritos-Shea; Shadi Abou-Zahra; Debra Ruh
>>Global; Dick; Neil Milliken; Alastair Campbell
>>Subject: '"Usable Accessibility'" TF VS. Higher education
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi Laura
>>
>>Regarding the the 2 new proposed new task forces
>>
>>UX intersecting with a11yHigher education
>>I think the the higher education issue is a low hanging fruit. I think
>>an experienced WCAG person who is in the education world could fairly
>>easily identify issues and gaps in WCAG for LMS, Teacher/student
>>bulletin boards, etc... and come back to the committee with a proposed
>>road map to meet the gaps. My guess is that most SCs would apply, but
>>perhaps some additional techniques in an extension.
>>
>>On the other hand UX is a huge field. I just don't see how we could add
>>that to our load. We have currently
>>
>>-Mobile
>>
>>-Cognitive
>>
>>-Techniques (HTML, WAI ARIA, maintenence of current techs)
>>
>>-Low vision
>>
>>How are we going to take UX on? We are about a 14 person committee, all
>>who have full time jobs and do this volunteer. It took us 2 years to
>>write 20 aria techniques.
>>
>>When I speak with UX experts I have a great respect for their art. They
>>have a respect for mine. There are many things about UX that are beyond
>>my expertise and interest, which is how I can fill the gap between what
>>people with disabilities can do and what others take for granted. I
>>recognize that elegant design means better accessibility in many
>>circumstances. In others it means worse accessibility for some.
>>
>>I'd rather address UX concerns within the context of the task forces
>>already set out. I'm guessing that there will be many UX proposals in
>>the cognitive TF, in the mobile and Low vision. I think through those
>>lenses we can propose some very good suggestions for UX experts to take
>>into their domain. I expect some of these will be best practices, but
>>many will be testable, and can find their way into the core.
>>
>>
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>David MacDonald
>>
>>
>>
>>CanAdaptSolutions Inc.

-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2015 18:06:17 UTC