- From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
- Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:23:08 +0100
- To: Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Thanks to Kai for working on this document. And apologies from me for not having contributed for several months. Here are a few suggestions: +Generally * Mark up the table of contents as a real UL list (without the BR line breaks). * The section for each BP "Relevant device properties" needs some explanation. I understand that this means properties that can be detected on the server. This is covered in the BP document under "3.5 Establishing Context" [4]. * I think that references should be marked in the text [REFERENCE_HANDLE] with a link to the section at the end of the page. +1.1 Purpose * "Mobile Web Best Practices contains sections against each best practice" might be better written as "Each of the Mobile Web Best Practices contains a section called "What to Test". * The preceding isn't really about the purpose of the document, but I can't see where else it fits in. * Missing space in "evaluationsin". +1.2 Relationship to mobileOK Basic Tests * The second paragraph ("Many of the tests described in mobileOK Basic Tests are...") is useful, and is an addendum to MWBP, but I don't think it belongs in this section as many of the tests described in this document are not useful when determining suitability of content for use on more advanced devices either. It's more a general comment on MWBP as a whole. * "completes the set of Best Practices" perhaps better as "completes the set of tests for the Best Practices" +2.1 Evaluation Scope It might be useful to cite the Web content Accessibility Guidelines (now a W3C Recommendation), the section about conformance that has two clauses "Full pages" and "Complete processes." These are not specific to accessibility and apply equally well to MWBP. So we should mention them I think. In fact, just below it the item "A concise description of the Web pages" is also relevant. +3.4 Background Image readability The Example should perhaps be an image (remembering STYLE_SHEETS_SUPPORT). Without CSS it is black on white. The WCAG 2.0 Techniques [2] give a list of tools to check this, including one developed especially for WCAG 2.0. I think that the Ishihara Test for Color Blindness isn't very useful as it consists of very specific examples. If people aren't using exactly those colours it won't help them. WCAG success criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) [3] gives a definition, and exceptions to this which might be worth mentioning. +3.5 Balance Under "Relevant device properties: Support for non-linear navigation across links" I didn't understand this until I read the rest of the section. Perhaps "non-sequential" or "skipping/jumping links" might be clearer. That's it for today, best regards, Alan [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#conformance-reqs [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/G18 [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-contrast [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#d0e437 Francois Daoust escribió: > Dear participants of the Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group, > > As agreed during today's call, I prepared a short questionnaire asking > for feedback on the Addendum to Mobile Web Best Practices document, with > a view to publishing the draft as a Working Group Note. The > questionnaire is opened until next call on 10 March 2009. > > The questionnaire to answer is available there: > http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/37584/BPWG-addendum-feedback/ > > The latest version of the document is available for review at: > http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20090210.html > > > Thanks, > Francois. > > > -- Alan Chuter Departamento de Usabilidad y Accesibilidad Consultor Technosite - Grupo Fundosa Fundación ONCE Tfno.: 91 121 03 30 Fax: 91 375 70 51 achuter@technosite.es http://www.technosite.es
Received on Wednesday, 4 March 2009 10:26:26 UTC