RE: [Easy Checks] Input

Hi Rabab,

Thank you for your review – some really great ideas here.

One thing to understand is that as it stands right now, this resource is near ready to publish, so we won’t be able to make major changes to this version.

Regardless, please enter these issues into GitHub as individual issues (https://github.com/w3c/wai-easy-checks/issues/new/choose). If there is something that is content based and doesn’t change the overall structure of the resource, please use a Butterfly review content issue template, but if it is a higher level change, please use a feature request template. This way we can look at them as “what can we do now” and “what can we do later.”

Thanks!
Brian

From: Rabab Gomaa <gomaarabab@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2024 5:47 AM
To: wai-eo-editors@w3.org
Cc: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Subject: [Easy Checks] Input

You don't often get email from gomaarabab@gmail.com<mailto:gomaarabab@gmail.com>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
CAUTION:EXTERNAL EMAIL SENDER!

Good morning,

I looked at the updated easy checks<https://www.w3.org/WAI/test-evaluate/easy-checks/>  and thought to share my thoughts.

  *   The updated version remains lengthy and in my opinion it still fails the requirement analysis of easy to use<https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Easy_Checks_2022#Requirements_Analysis> [.... presents a lot of textual and detailed information, getting in the way of a pleasant user experience and its main purpose].     I suggest using it as "Documentation for the Easy Checks" while each check remains short with a structure that is easy to follow.
  *   Currently, each check uses a separate bookmarklet. I recommend using a single bookmarklet, like ANDI<https://www.ssa.gov/accessibility/andi/help/install..html>, to cover most checks for better user learning. This approach would be more beneficial for the audiences, supporting their learning development as they progressively build their understanding of accessibility using the same tool.
  *   Also, there are naming discrepancies (e.g., "Images Alternative Text" vs. "Text Alternative") that should align with W3C naming conventions in WCAG.
I have attached a proposal for one of the easy checks, specifically "Text Alternative," which encompasses the three points mentioned above. I look forward to discussing these suggestions further in our meeting.

See you at 8:30 AM EST :)
Rabab Gomaa