W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > October 2008

Re: A few editorial comments on "Shared Web Experiences: Barriers Common to Mobile Device Users and People with Disabilities

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 18:57:08 +0200
Message-ID: <48E64EE4.5070202@w3.org>
To: Yeliz Yesilada <yesilady@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: wai-eo-editors@w3.org, Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG <public-bpwg@w3.org>

Thanks Yeliz,

It looks pretty good!

On:
>> Content formatted using tables or CSS...
>> -----
>> "Mobile Context: Meaning of content altered by reformatting or 
>> restructuring in adaptation process."
>> I completely miss the point here. Could you clarify?
>> I also wonder whether the following two best practices should also be 
>> listed here:
>> [TABLES_NESTED] Do not use nested tables.
>> [TABLES_ALTERNATIVES] Where possible, use an alternative to tabular 
>> presentation.
> 
> Added those two and also changed the text.

For clarification, I now understand what confused at first: it's the use 
of "adaptation" for something done by the client, which my brain 
translates as "rendering". The use of "adaptation" is perfectly fine, 
and matches the definition given in the Mobile Web Best Practices:
  http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#d0e402
So all is good! :-)

Francois.


Yeliz Yesilada wrote:
> Hi Francois,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. I have addressed all of them in the latest 
> version (<http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/experiences-new> and 
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/experiences-new-format>), please let me 
> know if you are happy with the changes.
> 
> On 10 Sep 2008, at 11:04, Francois Daoust wrote:
> 
>> In short, the document's content looks good and I agree with the 
>> consistency remark Jo just sent: you should choose between referring 
>> to users as "User", "Users", or even omitting it and stick to that. 
>> The same goes with "Device" which is sometimes referred to as "Mobile 
>> Device", and with "can't" sometimes written as "cannot", "don't" as 
>> "do not", ...
> 
> Changed all "can't" to "cannot" and "don't" to "do not".
> 
>>
>> Large page or large images
>> -----
>> "[User] is unable to relate different areas of a page so becomes 
>> disoriented or has to scroll excessively"
>> For ease of reading:
>> "[User] is unable to relate different areas of a page *, and* so 
>> becomes disoriented or has to scroll excessively"
> 
> Changed this.
> 
>>
>> Multimedia with no captions
>> -----
>> "often in noisy places (streets, nightclubs) can't hear."
>> Subject is missing:
>> "Users often can't hear in noisy places (streets, nightclubs)".
> 
> Changed this.
> 
>>
>>
>> Audio-only prompts...
>> -----
>> Again, for consistency purpose, the text should be the same as in 
>> "Multimedia with not captions".
> 
> Changed this.
> 
>>
>>
>> Free-text entry...
>> -----
>> I don't know if there is a reason for the order of the barriers, but I 
>> would move this one to after "Important information in non-text 
>> content..." so that all barriers referring to non-text alternatives 
>> are listed together.
> 
> Changed the ordering.
> 
>>
>> Embedded non-text objects...
>> -----
>> "Already small images re-dimensioned even smaller in adaptation, 
>> become meaningless"
>> The sentence is a bit obscure. Suggestion:
>> "Images shrunk in size to fit the device's screen may become meaningless"
>>
> 
> Changed this.
> 
>>
>> Important information in non-text content
>> -----
>> I'm not sure I see a clean distinction between that and the above 
>> "Embedded non-text objects..." barrier or even with the "Multimedia 
>> with no captions" one. I would simply remove this barrier, and 
>> possibly merge it with "Embedded non-text objects..." to emphasize the 
>> fact that this is primordial for "important" information.
> 
> I understand your comment but I would prefer to keep both as their focus 
> are slightly different.
> 
>>
>> Content formatted using tables or CSS...
>> -----
>> "Mobile Context: Meaning of content altered by reformatting or 
>> restructuring in adaptation process."
>> I completely miss the point here. Could you clarify?
>> I also wonder whether the following two best practices should also be 
>> listed here:
>> [TABLES_NESTED] Do not use nested tables.
>> [TABLES_ALTERNATIVES] Where possible, use an alternative to tabular 
>> presentation.
> 
> Added those two and also changed the text.
> 
>>
>> Missing or inappropriate page title
>> -----
>> "Missing, or inappropriate, or long page title means user cannot scan 
>> easily get an overview."
>> "to" is missing:
>> "Missing, or inappropriate, or long page title means user cannot scan 
>> easily *to* get an overview."
> 
> Changed this.
> 
>>
>> Not descriptive link label
>> -----
>> Shouldn't the title be "Non descriptive link label?"
>> There's a "t" missing in:
>> "User cannot determine to follow or no*t* to follow a link"
> 
> Changed this.
> 
>>
>>
>> Blinking, moving, scrolling or auto-updating content
>> -----
>> "make it difficult"
>> -> "make*s* it difficult"
> 
> Changed this.
> 
> Regards,
> Yeliz.
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 3 October 2008 16:57:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:59 UTC