edited draft for 143 - Motor automaticity and object permanence

Hi Folks


I was asked to write an received response to 143
<https://github.com/w3c/coga/issues/143> on Motor automaticity and object
permanence

 Send a  +1 if you agree - if not please add comments .



Proposal:

Thank you for your comments. We intend to add clarifications, based on your
comments, to pattern 4.2.3  pattern 4.3.4 and Persona: Amy Scenario 1.

 In addition you will find other places that we have address these issues:


Object permanence

Challenges with object permanence (not the particular phrase), are covered
in:

·        3.2.1 User Story: Findable includes the user need - "I can reach
important information and the controls I need without scrolling or carrying
out other actions. They are not hidden or off screen."

·        4.2.6 Pattern: Make the Relationship Clear Between Controls and
What They Affect - "Avoiding multiple or nested scrolling areas"

·        4.3.1 Pattern: Make it Easy to Identify the Most Important Tasks
and Features of the Site - "Placing the tasks/features towards the top of
the page so the user does not have to scroll to see them,

Placing the tasks/features toward the top of the content so assistive
technology finds them quickly"

·        4.3.4 Pattern: Ensure the Most Important Things on the Page are
Easy to Find - "Make key content visually stand out and be visible to users
without needing to scroll the page or hover over content."



Motor automaticity

Challenges around motor automaticity (not the particular phrase), are
covered in:

·        3.7.4 User Story: Cognitive Stress - "I need simple, consistent
content."

·        3.8.1 User Story: Adapt - "I need the controls to be consistently
positioned on the screen where I expect them to be."

·        4.2.3 Pattern: Use a Consistent Visual Design - "Use a consistent
visual design across groups of pages." and "Layout is consistent across
blocks of content, including position of interactive elements and
navigational controls."




Adding the terms into the document, the glossary, and Use Cases/Personas is
bigger than we can handle in the time we have available for publishing
version 1.  We would like to address these issues more in the next version
(1.1) of our document, when we will have more time.  We intend to consider
for version 1.1:

·        Adding the terms  motor automaticity  and object permanence into
the document to make it easier for those looking for the term to find the
appropriate user stories and patterns

·        Adding the terms into the glossary if the term becomes added into
the document

·        Adding the terms into a Use Case/Persona


Thanks again for your review and help


The task force