W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org > May 2017

Re: Do we like this better? - was way to move forward with plain language

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 13:23:58 +0000
To: lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
CC: "w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FBB0D93D-64CB-4A91-8FC6-DC34D54FAF66@nomensa.com>
> "Provide words or phrases  or abbreviations that are the most-common form to refer to the concept "

So to test conformance someone would have to go through every term used in the navigation / instructions / labels and check if that is the most common term for that concept?

E.g. for

·         Hobbies & Crafts

·         Haberdashery

·         Crafts

·         Games & Puzzles

·         Books

·         Stationery

·         Gift Experiences

·         Guitars & Accessories

You’d have to check about 2000 terms in that website, and you might have to check the contents it links through to in order to understand what concept they are using it for.

That seems like it would take days, and doesn’t address the point that a guideline is the wrong tool for the job (compared to UX process & testing with people).

The impact of it being the wrong tool is that if an organisation does optimisation (via usability testing, A/B testing etc.) then they would reject the result of an accessibility guideline based only on commonality.

Cheers,

-Alastair


Received on Monday, 22 May 2017 13:24:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:23:58 UTC