- From: Daniel Montalvo Charameli <dmontalvo@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:58:20 +0200
- To: hidde@w3.org, wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
Hello Hidde: Thanks for this piece of feedback. Good catch! According to your feedback (and several others'): > I wonder if we should use abbreviations of the standards (WCAG, ATAG, etc) as they may be wider known? I think it is important to have the complete names of the standards up front. We might know them by their abbreviation but let's imagine a situation where somebody is reading this curriculum and does not know very much about accessibility. Looking for the meaning of the different abbreviations would be an extra effort I think we should not provoke. You are right that it is good to use the abbreviation once the standards have been introduced. In the live draft this has been changed to include both the Abbreviations and the complete titles. The first time they are mentioned, I include both the abbreviation and the complete name: > ## Learning Outcomes > > * Define the scope of Web Content (WCAG), Authoring Tools (ATAG), User Agent (UAAG), and Accessible Rich Internet Application (WAI-ARIA) Guidelines and their relevance for accessibility Subsequent mentions of the standards are made via the abbreviation: > ### Topic: Standards and Guidelines > #### Learning Outcomes > * List the current W3C accessibility standards: WCAG, ATAG, UAAG, and WAI-ARIA Hope this is clearer (and cleaner) now. Thanks again for the feedback. On 8/28/2019 10:18 AM, Hidde de Vries via WBS Mailer wrote: > The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'WAI-Curricula: > Draft Review for unit 4 "Standards and guidelines"' (Education and Outreach > Working Group) for Hidde de Vries. > >> --------------------------------- >> Overview >> >> ---- >> This survey is for a first review of Unit 4: Standards and Guidelines >> teaching unit, as part of the Introduction to Web Accessibility" teaching >> module. >> >> Background: WAI Curricula Requirements Analysis >> >> Focus for your review: >> * Are all topics covered well? Is anything missing? Is anything in there >> that shouldn't be? >> * Try to note any significant issues at this point, so we can address >> them now. >> * Comments on details, including wording, are welcome at this point. >> Feel free to comment in the below edit boxes or to open a New GitHub >> Issue >> >> Note: The review versions linked above will not change during the review >> period. The editor will address some issues as they come in, so the live >> draft might change during this review period. You might want to check >> GitHub issues and the live updates before doing your review: Live draft - >> Unit 4 - Standards and Guidelines >> > Comments: > I think this is a great page, I have not found significant issues. > >> >> --------------------------------- >> Review level and timing >> >> ---- >> Please indicate below the level of consideration you were able to provide >> for this review. If you were unable to get to it and would like more >> time, please indicate that as well. Thanks! >> >> > * (x) I read the material carefully > . > * ( ) I skimmed the material > > * ( ) I need more time and have put a date below when I can get to it. > * ( ) I am not going to be able to review this material and will defer to > the decisions of the group. > > > >> >> --------------------------------- >> Unit 4: Standards and Guidelines >> >> ---- >> Focus on unit 4 Standards and Guidelines: >> * Do you agree with the introduction, learning outcomes, and >> competences? >> * Do you think Learning Outcomes and Ideas for Assessment are coherent >> and feasible? >> * Do you agree with the wording, tone, and approach? >> * Do you have other thoughts, suggestions, or comments? >> Please feel free to comment in the below text box or open a dedicated >> GitHub Issue for Unit 4 >> > Comments: > Learning outcomes and ideas for assessment look good to me. Overall I like > the structure and tone. > > I wonder if we should use abbreviations of the standards (WCAG, ATAG, etc) > as they may be wider known? > > > >> >> --------------------------------- >> Topic: Principles of Accessible Design >> >> ---- >> Focus on topic Principles of Accessible Design: >> * Do you agree with the introduction and learning outcomes? >> * Do you think Learning Outcomes, Teaching Ideas, and Homework Ideas >> are aligned? >> * Do you think Teaching Ideas and Homework Ideas cover well the scope >> of this topic? >> * Do you agree with the wording, tone, and approach? >> * Do you have further ideas or suggestions? >> Please feel free to comment in the below text box or open a dedicated >> GitHub Issue for Topic Principles of Accessible Design >> > Comments: > Looks good. > > Under “Homework Ideas”, the very last sentence does not end: “For > instance, use the“ > >> >> --------------------------------- >> Topic: Standards and Guidelines >> >> ---- >> Focus on topic Standards and Guidelines: >> * Do you agree with the introduction and learning outcomes? >> * Do you think Learning Outcomes, Teaching Ideas, and Homework Ideas >> are aligned? >> * Do you think Teaching Ideas and Homework Ideas cover well the scope >> of this topic? >> * Do you agree with the wording, tone, and approach? >> * Do you have further ideas or suggestions? >> Please feel free to comment in the below text box or open a dedicated >> GitHub Issue for Topic Standards and Guidelines >> >> > Comments: > I wonder if this section should say something about accessibility beyond > guidelines? Even a site that conforms to all guidelines can have severe > barriers, and I think it would be important to teach that when teaching the > guidelines. > >> >> --------------------------------- >> Topic: First Checks for Web Accessibility >> >> ---- >> Focus on topic First Checks for Web Accessibility: >> * Do you agree with the introduction and learning outcomes? >> * Do you think Learning Outcomes, Teaching Ideas, and Homework Ideas >> are aligned? >> * Do you think Teaching Ideas and Homework Ideas cover well the scope >> of this topic? >> * Do you agree with the wording, tone, and approach? >> * Do you have further ideas or suggestions? >> Please feel free to comment in the below text box or open a dedicated >> GitHub Issue for Topic First Checks for Web Accessibility >> >> > Comments: > Minor nitpick: under teaching ideas, “Understandable” does not start > with a capital letter, but “Operable” does. > >> >> --------------------------------- >> Any other Thoughts/suggestions? >> >> ---- >> Any other thoughts or suggestions? >> >> > Comments: > Great work! > >> These answers were last modified on 28 August 2019 at 08:15:54 U.T.C. >> by Hidde de Vries >> > Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/standards-and-guidelines-draft-review/ > until 2019-08-28. > > Regards, > > The Automatic WBS Mailer > --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2019 10:58:24 UTC