RE: Please review: EO Response

Best wishes

From: Rachael Bradley Montgomery <>
Sent: 10 March 2021 18:29
To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <>
Subject: Please review: EO Response

CAUTION: This e-mail originated outside the University of Southampton.

The draft response to EO is below my signature. Please take a look today and send a +1 if you approve or send changes needed.

Thank you,




Thank you for taking the time to conduct a detailed review of Making Content Usable.  We found the comments useful and incorporated many of them. In some cases, we have discussed issues with the EO chairs and staff and within the COGA group to reach resolution. Please see the final resolution to each issue below. Please respond before March 17th if you have any concerns. The most current version of the document is at:<>

205 - Request to "Remove the sections 2.3 Building the User into the Development Process and remove sections 5.1-5.4 of Usability Testing, Focus Groups and Feedback"
The COGA taskforce feels strongly that there is great value in these sections and decided not to remove them. After discussion with EO chairs and reviewing the detailed comments from a follow up survey with EO, we rewrote the content to address the primary areas of concern such as referring to finding people with cognitive disabilities as "easy",  more clearly framing the section. and linking to the EO resource on this topic.  The updated section can be reviewed at<>

206  For sections 5.5.1-5.5.8., make it clearer that they directly relate to a specific one of the "Objectives".
We tried adding content to make this clearer but found it made reading more difficult. We made sure the section titles map closely to the objective names.

207 Link to additional resources
We have linked to the EO resource on this topic.

208 - Remove appendix B
The COGA taskforce feels strongly that there is great value in this section and decided not to remove it however we trimmed it down, combined it with the business section, and linked to the broader EO resource.  You can view the changes at<>

209 - Provide the information in a more consumable way than a single TR doc
COGA will continue working with Shadi and Hidde on the interactive web version. We will leave this issue open for the future.

210 -  Rewrite section 2.1 "How to Use this Document" to provide guidance for designers, developers, and writers on how to use the document.
We have updated this section and added a link to the appendix some members found more helpful.

211 - Move "Following the advice in this document as much as possible will be particularly valuable for Web content and applications that address: ... [list]" to the main part of the Introduction or a separate section.
This has been done.

212 - In the Introduction, add a few sentences that more clearly and succinctly provides guidance on using this document in policy and other contexts
We have made this change. Please see<>

213 - Summary, Appendix A: Mapping User Needs, Persona and Patterns, Introduction, Objectives
COGA experimented with moving the appendix up but it made the document difficult to read. We instead link to it in How to Use this Document. Please see:<>

214 - Put the Introduction first
We have reworked the introduction per other suggestions. The Abstract, Status and Summary must come before the introduction. The introduction is the first part of the main content. We have added "(Easy to Understand Language)" as part of the Summary header to reduce confusion.

215 - Change "Summary" to something like "Objectives and Overview".
The summary is the easy read portion of this document.  We have added "(Easy to Understand Language)" as part of the Summary header to reduce confusion.

216 -  In the tables, also link the User Stories and Design Patterns
This is one of the last steps in preparing the document and will be done before publication.
218 - Improve readability to have the hanging indent after that images
This is done.

219 - add a subheading such as "Not WCAG Requirements"
The language in the introduction is the result of a great deal of consensus building. We did not change this further.

220 - I had difficulty understanding objectives 1 and 3
After discussion, we addressed this by adding introduction text to clarify each objective rather than changing the objective names.

222 - Please change some persona names so diverse ethnicities are included.
Done. The changes were run by the internationalization group.

223 - QA review and copy edit
We conducted a plain language audit and several editorial reviews of the entire document.

235 - copyedit and consistency edit
We made changes so lists are consistent.

Thank you again for taking the time to make our document better.

The COGA Taskforce

Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2021 20:17:10 UTC