Re: Editing suggestions for BAD (Before and After Demonstration)

Hi Jennifer,

Thank you for your comments. The title issue needs discussion but 
otherwise all edits were addressed. See below for more details:


On 4.10.2011 22:56, Jennifer Sutton wrote:
> EO-Editors:
>
> Here are my editorial changes for "BAD." Please don't take the time to
> comment on each one. Since they're small changes and shouldn't take
> long, hopefully, they can be addressed before Oct. 11.
>
> A. You might want to be sure to change both the copyright date and the
> "last updated" date(s) throughout. I've not noted them below.
>
> I imagine this will be done, as a matter of course, but I noticed it
> says "copyright 2010," and the page uris have 2009 in them, so they may
> need to change.

The URI will change for the final publication. The copyright notices 
(within the demo) were updated.


> B. Maybe this idea was vetoed, or I thought about but never said it --
> would it be possible to change all of the page-titles so it'd show, in
> them, whether you were on accessible or inaccessible? It'd make it
> easier when alt-tabbing among pages. Maybe I'm missing it.
>
> Maybe the idea was vetoed because it'd be too obvious for people if they
> were being tested?

It is intended to be one of the "features" to be demonstrated but it was 
raised as an issue before. I'd like to discuss this with EOWG.


> C. Some of the information looks like it may repeat, and I can't promise
> to catch all duplications.

Not sure what you mean. The pages are somewhat inter-related to give a 
notion of a realistic website.


> 1. http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/
>
>
> 1.1. "Browsing through the inaccessible Demo pages using different
> browser configurations or [JS: change assisistive to assistive]
> technologies (such as"

Fixed.


> 1.2. "It communicates the [JS: change problemes to problems] to managers"

Fixed.


> 2. http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/before/home/
> Some of this also looks like it appears on:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/before/news/

Yes. The news highlights on the home page lead to the full articles on 
the news page. Maybe it makes more sense on the accessible pages?


> 2.1. I'm not quite sure what this means. Instead of "that," do you mean
> "saying?" Or should it be "that says"?
>
>
> "This logo is followed by a black banner that 'CITYLIGHTS' which is the
> name"

Fixed.


> 2.2. "follows in a turqoise green handwriting"
>
> I believe it's turquoise.
>
> I'm not a color expert, but maybe it'd be better to pick which color it
> is. Wikipedia says, in part:
>
> "Turquoise is an opaque, blue-to-green mineral that is a"

Fixed.


> 2.3. "slant [JS: change accross to across] the top banner"

Fixed.


> 3. http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/after/home/annotations
>
> 3.1. "Note 04: Image with 'null' text [JS: change alterantive to
> alternative]"

Fixed.


> 3.2. This image is displayed for decorative purposes only, and thus has
> [JS: add an] empty (null) text alternative

Fixed.


> 3.3. "The news items are presented using CSS rather [JS: add than] table
> layout."

Fixed.


> 3.4. "Links have a [JS: change distintive to distinctive] appearance
> using color and non-color cues (underline)."

Fixed.


> 3.5. "The decorative list bullet is displayed using CSS rather than the
> img element with [JS: add an] empty (null) text alternative."

Fixed.


> 4. http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/before/news/annotations
>
> 4.1. "The spacing between the two main columns of text is too little."
>
> Suggest rewording to:
> The two main columns of text need more space between them.

Agreed.


> 5. http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/before/tickets/annotations
>
> 5.1. "Tables headings are indicated by the colored background but have
> not been marked up sematically using the th element. Also, the table
> title has not been
> associeted with the table."
>
> Three items in the above:
> -- Should it be Table headings, rather than Tables headings?
> -- "have not been marked up sematically" Should be semantically.
> --associeted Should be associated.

Fixed.


> 5.2. "and text is hard to read due to full-justifaction," Should be
> justification.

Fixed.


> 6. http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/after/survey/annotations
>
> 6.1. "Form [JS: change instructuions to instructions] are provided,
> especially with respect to required fields."

Fixed.


> 6.2. "The sequence of labels and input fields are organized to make
> sense and input fields are associated with their labels using the label
> element."
>
> I think it should be "The sequence of . . . is organized to..."

Reworded the text.


> 7. http://www.w3.org/WAI/demos/bad/draft/2009/after/template/annotations
>
> 7.1. "The page layout is organized using CSS rather than table element,
> which helps maintain a reading order that matches the visual presentation."
>
> I'm not sure what is meant. Should it be "the table element?" "a table
> element?" Or "table elements?"

Fixed.


> 7.2. No need to answer, but are the skip links visible, in some way, for
> those who may need to see them? If so, that may be worth mentioning in
> the annotations. I'm a fan of visible skip links (if we must have them),
> especially to make them visible for those who need them, even if they're
> not visible all the time.
>
> I know this point isn't editorial, and it's absolutely NOT a
> show-stopper. I imagine it was fully discussed within the group.

Explanatory note has been added.


> 7.3. "Note 04: Image with [JS: change succint to succinct] text
> alternative"

Fixed.


> NOTE: I didn't review the reports, specifically; I imagine they were
> compiled via a lot of copy & paste from other pages that'd been reviewed.

I hope so too :)


> I hope these comments are helpful.

Yes, very. Thanks a lot.


Best,
   Shadi


> Jennifer
>
>
>

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)

Received on Thursday, 6 October 2011 07:15:37 UTC