W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org > April 2015

RE: draft methodology

From: Rochford, John <john.rochford@umassmed.edu>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:05:22 +0000
To: "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
CC: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <55BD19D83AA2BE499FBE026983AB2B58362CE76A@ummscsmbx01.ad.umassmed.edu>
Hi Lisa,

Yes, a discussion during the next call would be good.

I had missed the definition of “SC” in the key. Thank you for pointing it out.

BTW, it appears references to “criteria,” because they are for a singular instance, should actually be references to “criterion.”

John

John Rochford<http://profiles.umassmed.edu/profiles/display/132901>
UMass Medical School/E.K. Shriver Center
Director, INDEX Program
Instructor, Family Medicine & Community Health
www.DisabilityInfo.org
Twitter: @ClearHelper<https://twitter.com/clearhelper>
[Facebook Button]<http://www.facebook.com/pages/New-England-INDEXShriver-CenterUMass-Medical-School/227064920160>[Twitter Button]<https://twitter.com/NEINDEX> [WordPress Logo] <http://www.disabilityinfo.org/blog/>

From: lisa.seeman [mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:34 AM
To: Rochford, John
Cc: public-cognitive-a11y-tf
Subject: RE: draft methodology

Hi John,
Thanks for reviewing.  I do not really understand the problem. Are you suggesting we do separate methodologies for items that are widely applicable to thoughs at are more limited in scope? This is just to identify gaps for what is need. It might be easier to explain it in the next call.

The abbreviations are explained - RS is explained below the key - but i will add again so it is easier.
All the best

Lisa Seeman

Athena ICT Accessibility Projects <http://accessibility.athena-ict.com>
LinkedIn<http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter<https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>



---- On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 23:11:09 +0300 Rochford<john.rochford@umassmed.edu<mailto:john.rochford@umassmed.edu>> wrote ----

Hi Lisa,



My understanding about the gap analyses is that we are going to address techniques, accommodations, and issues in common across cognitive disabilities, then those unique to each disability. I don't see that approach reflected in the methodology.



Also, I apologize, but I don't know the definitions of the abbreviations "RS" and "SC". Perhaps they could be spelled out upon their first appearances in the doc.



John



John Rochford<http://profiles.umassmed.edu/profiles/display/132901>
UMass Medical School/E.K. Shriver Center
Director, INDEX Program
Instructor, Family Medicine & Community Health
www.DisabilityInfo.org<http://www.DisabilityInfo.org>
Twitter: @ClearHelper<https://twitter.com/clearhelper>

 <http://www.facebook.com/pages/New-England-INDEXShriver-CenterUMass-Medical-School/227064920160>

-----Original Message-----
From: lisa.seeman [mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 3:28 PM
To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf
Subject: draft methodology





Hi

I made a draft for methodology for the gap analysis



https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Methodology_for_gap_analysis




It is a first draft, please comment, edit etc...





All the best



Lisa Seeman



Athena ICT Accessibility Projects <http://accessibility.athena-ict.com>

LinkedIn <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/> , Twitter <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>






 <http://www.facebook.com/pages/New-England-INDEXShriver-CenterUMass-Medical-School/227064920160>
 <http://www.facebook.com/pages/New-England-INDEXShriver-CenterUMass-Medical-School/227064920160>
Received on Thursday, 2 April 2015 10:05:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 2 April 2015 10:05:53 UTC