Re: Re[2]: Do SCs need to be testable?

Also, this does not need to fall solely on the author/content developer.
The browser has a huge role to play in the "auto personalization" area. I
don't want thousands of content developers writing thousands of interfaces
to personalize their website. Much of the personalization must come from
the browser.

Jim

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 9:20 AM, josh@interaccess.ie <josh@interaccess.ie>
wrote:

>
>
>>
>>  On Oct 29, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
>>> wrote:
>>>  This brings up a question …  What are via alternatives to creating SCs?
>>> Without the SC approach, would it merely result a tranche of new
>>> techniques, or is there some other new or unused mechanism that might be an
>>> alternative?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think the alternative would be to have guidelines and examples.
>>
>> The guidelines do not need to be testable — but set a goal.
>>
>> The examples show how it can be done.
>>
>> The idea would be to go beyond what you can require   because requiring
>> something means it must be testable and apply everywhere.  And there are so
>> many good ideas that don’t match these two requirements and therefore don’t
>> get recorded.
>>
>> Also - trying to get more things required will get much push back from
>> industry.   And for some reason they are very against things that relate to
>> what they view as ‘usability’ - which is much or all of cognitive
>> disability.     The are very much FOR it in design — but not for it being
>> required.   The way to ride that — is to create a great manual on how to do
>> it — but avoid making SC or requirements because    a) it will then be
>> resisted and diminished   b) you will have to leave out — or diminish
>> yourself -  so many good ideas because they can’t be SC and if you have a
>> few SC and mostly not— the mostly not (which will most of the great stuff)
>> will be second class citizens in your own document.
>>
>> Very useful info, thanks Gregg
>
> Josh
>
>
>
>>
>> Gregg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Oct 29, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi all,
>>>
>>>  TTBOMK, any new success criterion must be testable. If not, it’s a
>>> clear departure from the original WCAG requirements framework. If we do
>>> need to depart from the framework (for whatever reason) – then we cannot
>>> call these new SCs success criteria. We’d need to come up with something
>>> else. I’m only making an objective statement here, and not making any value
>>> judgement.
>>>
>>>  This brings up a question relating to one of Greggs comments (and
>>> thanks Gregg for your very helpful input). What are via alternatives to
>>> creating SCs? Without the SC approach, would it merely result a tranche of
>>> new techniques, or is there some other new or unused mechanism that might
>>> be an alternative?
>>>
>>>  Thanks
>>>
>>>  Josh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Jim Allan, Accessibility Coordinator
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9264  http://www.tsbvi.edu/
"We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964