W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-eo-editors@w3.org > November 2010

Re: Comments on Perspectives on usability and accessibility draft

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:07:19 -0600
Message-ID: <4CED2A27.8070103@w3.org>
To: DavidSloan <DSloan@computing.dundee.ac.uk>
CC: wai-eo-editors@w3.org
Thanks, Dave!

We are working through your comments along with comments from other reviewers, and discussing issues with EOWG. We hope to have a revised draft within a couple of weeks.

~Shawn & Shadi

On 11/23/2010 5:46 PM, DavidSloan wrote:
> Hi Shawn, Shadi,
> Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the draft document "Web
> Accessibility and Usability Working Together."
> My thoughts are below. Please feel free to get in touch if you need any
> clarification on my comments.
> Best wishes,
> Dave
> Overall, it's a very useful addition to the WAI suite of documents, and
> should help to clarify the relationship of usability and UCD to
> accessibility.
> Here are a few specific comments - apologies for the pedantic nature of
> most of the suggested corrections! I've ordered them by section for ease
> of reference.
> Introduction
> I'm not sure about the sentence:
> "In most situations there is no need to differentiate between usability
> and accessibility, because their goals are complimentary."
> At a minimum, should be 'complementary'? But, semantically speaking, if
> the roles are complementary (i.e. two distinct parts that together make
> a whole), then there *would* be a need to distinguish between them so as
> not to leave any gaps?
> Perhaps a rewrite could be:
> "In most situations there is no need to differentiate between usability
> and accessibility, because their goals are ultimately the same - to
> ensure that as many as possible of a web site's target audience can use
> the site for its intended purpose."
> # Understanding Accessibility
> The first paragraph starts with a very firm, definitive statement:
> "Accessibility is about ensuring an equivalent user experience for
> people with disabilities."
> But the second paragraph says " Some accessibility guidelines primarily
> meet the needs of people with disabilities." Which would beg a reader to
> ask - "ok, so what do the remaining accessibility guidelines do?"
> For me, the two sentences above don't scan well. Perhaps what should be
> meant in the first section is that "Accessibility is about firstly
> ensuring an equivalent user experience for people with disabilities -
> and secondly for those disabled by their browsing environment."
> ('firstly' and 'secondly' could be replaced by 'primarily' and
> 'secondarily' if there needs to be a hierarchy)
> This rewrite would mean the second paragraph makes more sense as is, and
> also introduces the 'other beneficiaries' argument expanded in the third
> paragraph.
> # Understanding Usability and User-Centered Design (UCD)
> In this section, could there be a direct link to a page on the ISO 9241
> standard (or maybe reference UserFocus' Bluffer's Guide to 9241)?
> # Real People
> This is the most important, and powerful section of the whole page, and
> is very well put across. Maybe you could emphasise "People with
> disabilities effectively interacting with and contributing to the Web is
> the end goal" using appropriate markup or making it a standalone
> paragraph?
> # Working Together with Accessibility
> Minor grammatical issue in the first paragraph - the content in
> parentheses beginning (Whereas...) is not a sentence - so I would either
> replace the parentheses with a comma, extending the previous sentence,
> or replace "Whereas" with "By contrast, " and remove the parentheses.
> The first of the three issues - perhaps there could be a more explicit
> invitation for people to contribute research data that
> supports/questions/potentially extends WCAG? If the goal is to avoid
> fragmentation of effort and multiple sets of design guidelines, one
> action should be to direct research activity that generates valid
> evidence towards improving WCAG rather that presenting
> independent/conflicting guidelines.
> The second of the three issues - I'm not sure this sufficiently
> emphasises the point being made, which I think is that independent
> efforts to create web design guidelines might perpetuate placing
> inappropriate or unnecessary demands or restrictions on content authors
> when the issue to be resolved is at the user agent level?
> The University of Dundee is a Scottish Registered Charity, No. SC015096.
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2010 15:07:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:25:21 UTC