W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-eo-editors@w3.org > September 2005

copyedits on Evaluation pages

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:33:50 -0500
Message-ID: <43211EBE.7020201@w3.org>
To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Cc: wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>

Hi, Shadi,

Great job on the latest round of Evaluation document edits!

> address only ... serious concerns with the content of the existing 
> pages, and to hold off on any significant editing and minor issues.
I just reviewed the introductory paragraphs and skimmed the format of the rest of the doc. I did not review the content in detail.

Below are some copyedit suggestions -- all for editor's discretion. I've also included suggestions to be considered for a later revision (to be added to the changelog, but no need to address now! :).

Best,
~ Shawn

> - Evaluating Web Accessibility 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/Overview.html

* copyedit, first paragraph.
current: "The measures described here are intended to supplement an organization's existing procedures for content management and quality assurance on their Web sites."

suggestion: "The approaches in these pages are intended to supplement other content management and quality assurance procedures."
rationale: use "approach" from earlier in paragraph rather than introduce new term "measures", an organization might not have existing QA

* content fix (not change, really),  "Considerations for Specific Contexts"
current: "Describes evaluation during the development process, ongoing monitoring, evaluation of legacy sites, and evaluation of dynamically generated Web pages."
suggestion: "Describes considerations for evaluation of large and complex Web sites, evaluation of dynamically-generated Web pages, evaluation during the development process, and ongoing monitoring of existing sites."

> - Preliminary Review... 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/preliminary.html

* copyedit, first paragraph
current: "A preliminary review may help to quickly identify the scope of problems on a Web site. However, the preliminary review will not catch all of the problems on a site and should not be used to determine conformance level. A preliminary review does not include perspectives from a variety of users with disabilities nor does it touch or test every accessibility aspect of a site."

suggestion: "A preliminary review can quickly identify some accessibility problems on a Web site. A preliminary review does not check every accessibility issue and will not catch all of the problems on a site. Thus the method described in this page is not sufficient to determine if a Web site conforms to Web accessibility guidelines. Other pages in this <a href="Overview">Evaluation Resource Suite</a> address conformance evaluation and related evaluation topics."

* copyedit, Page Contents
current: "Required Steps"
suggestion: "Steps To Conduct a Preliminary Review"

* copyedit or changelog for next revision
current: <h3>s are kinda title case (e.g., 1. Select a Representative Sampling of Pages from the Web Site to be Reviewed)
suggestion: change to sentence case (e.g., 1. Select a representative sampling of pages from the Web site to be reviewed)

* changelog for next revision
- take out the <h2>Steps To Conduct a Preliminary Review, and the paragraph under it would become part of the introduction
- make the current <h3>s be <h2>s, shorten the text (e.g., "1. Select a Representative Sampling of Pages from the Web Site to be Reviewed" becomes "1. Select a representative page sample"), and add those to the Page Contents
- re-consider & make consistent beginning capitalization & ending punctuation in list items

> - Conformance Evaluation... 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/conformance.html

* copyedit, Page Contents
suggestion: update to match <h2>s

* copyedit, first section
current: "A conformance evaluation combines automatic, semi-automatic, and manual testing of accessibility features. It is a technical assessment of the conformance to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 1.0 and does not include evaluation with users which is described in a separate document. Conformance evaluations require familiarity with Web mark-up languages; initial downloading and/or training on a variety of evaluation tools and approaches; configuration of browser settings; and experience in Web accessibility.
Scope of Conformance Evaluations
A properly conducted conformance evaluation can identify potentially major problems during the development phase for a new site; determine what level of accessibility a Web site meets; and/or provide assurance that a Web site meets a required level of accessibility. However, it does not include evaluation with users which is important to identify problems in how the technical solutions are being applied. Comprehensive evaluations of Web sites combine technical assessments and usability testing of accessibility features."

suggestion: take out <h3>Scope of Conformance Evaluations</h3> and make the intro:
"A <em>conformance evaluation</em> determines if a Web site meets accessibility standards, such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 1.0. This page describes a conformance evaluation method that combines automatic, semi-automatic, and manual testing of Web site accessibility. It can be used when developing a new site, or to evaluate an existing site.

This page focuses on technical assessment and does not include involving users with disabilities, which will be addressed in a <href="http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-eval-ut">separate document</a>. Including users in evaluation helps ensure that technical accessibility solutions are applied effectively. Evaluations that combine technical assessment and usability testing of accessibility features can be called <em>comprehensive evaluations</em>.

The conformance evaluation method described below requires:
<ul>
<li>familiarity with Web mark-up languages (such as XHTML),
<li>access to and skill with a variety of evaluation tools and approaches, and
<li>knowledge and experience in Web accessibility."

* copyedit, Page Contents
current: "Required Steps"
suggestion: "Steps To Conduct a Conformance Evaluation"

* copyedit or changelog for next revision
current: <h3>s are kinda title case
suggestion: change to sentence case

* changelog for next revision
- take out the <h2>Steps To Conduct a Conformance Evaluation, and the paragraph under it would become part of the introduction
- make the current <h3>s be <h2>s, shorten the text, and add those to the Page Contents
- re-consider & make consistent beginning capitalization & ending punctuation in list items
- perhaps change "steps" to "tasks" or something. take the numbers out of the subheadings. edit "Note: while determining the scope of the evaluation is a key first step, and summarizing and reporting the results of evaluation is the logical conclusion, the order of the intervening steps is not crucial." 
- reformat the sections & nested <ol>s & <ul>s & spacing to make easier to "parse"

> - Special Considerations... 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/considerations.html

* copyedit, <h2>s & Page Contents
current: mixed capitalization
suggestion: Make consistently title-style capitalization
suggestion: make sure Page Contents match <h2>s (think one is missing)

* copyedit, first paragraph
current: "It describes considerations for evaluation of large and complex Web sites, during the development process, ongoing monitoring, evaluation of legacy sites, and evaluation of dynamically generated Web pages."
suggestion: "It describes considerations for evaluation of large and complex Web sites, evaluation during the development process, ongoing monitoring of accessibility, evaluation of legacy sites, and evaluation of dynamically-generated Web pages."

? should "dynamically-generated Web pages" be hyphenated?

* question for EOWG?
title of this page is now "Considerations for Specific Contexts", which doesn't match will with the current/draft left nav short name "Special Consideration". what should the "short name" for the nav be? "Specific Contexts"?

* copyedit, Evaluation of Large and Complex Web Sites
several typos, I wont list here 'cause sending content changes to EOWG list

* changelog for next revision
- re-order the sections for better grouping of similar topics
- reconsider the entire "Evaluation of legacy sites" section

> 3. Selecting Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools
> * latest draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/selectingtools.html

sorry, didn't get to this page before an out of steam :(
Received on Friday, 9 September 2005 05:33:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 12 January 2010 00:13:12 GMT