W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-eo-editors@w3.org > September 2008

Re: Comments on Comparative requirements analysis for older Web users

From: Andrew Arch <andrew@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 14:42:11 +0200
Message-ID: <48C91223.4030403@w3.org>
To: shawn@w3.org
CC: wai-eo-editors@w3.org

Thanks for the comments Shawn,

I've been through the 8/Aug and 5/Sept EO minutes as well and think I've 
accommodated everything as appropriate.

The document is updated on http://www.w3.org/WAI/WAI-AGE/comparative.html

Note I'm still trying to get hold of Liam for some CSS assistance. See 
below also.

Andrew

shawn@w3.org wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> Below are additional comments on
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/WAI-AGE/comparative.html>
> 
> 1. "Comparative requirements analysis for older Web users"
> Please reconsider the title. See EOWG minutes from 5 Sept for ideas.

DONE - and the collected ideas listed for this week, then scrapped.

> 2. "Recommendations identified from the Literature Review:" column header
> Can you simplify this? Perhaps "Recommendations from others" or such? See
> the text in my suggested Introduction for wording ideas.

Trying "Collected recommendations"

> 3. "A version of the table that considers ATAG and UAAG in addition to
> WCAG is also available
> A more detailed version of the table that considers WCAG 2.0 sufficient
> and advisory techniques is also available."
> How about having just one other version that has both? How about making
> that an Appendix of the Lit Rev itself (and this simple page/table a "WAI
> resource")?

In progress.

> 4. "Key to symbols and abbreviations used in the tables - CP means
> Checkpoint - n.a. means that no WCAG 1.0 checkpoints were applicable -
> n.c. means no comments were required"
> 
> You can get rid of "CP" since that's not longer used in this document.
> I don't think you need both n.a. and n.c. &#8211; just "n.a." means no
> WCAG 1.0 checkpoints are applicable and there are no comments.
> So then you can make this section into a simple sentence.

CP was supposed to be GL - swapped and retained as GL is still used. 
Thoughts?

If we can dispose of "GL", then the simple sentence would also go 
off-screen just as soon as the "n.a." goes off-screen

> More importantly, please reconsider the issue of what to put in the empty
> cells, if anything. We need to check best practices for empty cells in a
> data table...

See separate email. Trying off-screen comment in the interim.

> 5. Comments.
> Could you take another edit pass at the comments. I&#8217;m not sure why
> some of them are there. Specifically, some just expound on the
> recommendation.

Tried to tidy up - any you think should still be scrapped?

> 6. Cell alignment.
> I suggest aligning top, e.g., td {vertical-align: top;}
> Also, in order to have equal alignment, either all cells need to be <p>s
> or none of them.

DONE

> 7. Other suggestions incorporated in the Introduction suggestion sent in a
> separate e-mail.

Thanks for that - adapted and used

> 8. In EOWG on 5 Sept we got into discussions about purpose and audience
> that would have been answered in a requirements/analysis. I know we do not
> want to spend much time on it; however, I wonder if we do need a few
> bullet points to agree on?

Did you make some notes on this?

> Thanks for considering these.
> 
> Regards,
> ~Shawn
> 

-- 
Andrew Arch
Web Accessibility and Ageing Specialist
W3C/ERCIM, Sophia Antipolis, France
Ph +33 (0)4 92 38 79 46
www.w3.org/WAI/WAI-AGE/
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2008 12:42:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 12 January 2010 00:13:17 GMT