Re: final review for content usable 1.0

Hi I have added in clarifications into the document.

Thanks

Lisa

On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 8:00 PM Rain Michaels <rainb@google.com> wrote:

> Hi Lisa et. al.,
>
> I've added several more editing pull requests to the consistency_checks
> branch.
>
> Additionally, here are a couple of additional things that I found:
>
> *Under 6.6.4 Kwame Scenario 4
> <https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html#kwame-scenario-4-understanding-where-information-is-in-a-hierarchical-structure>,
> I was unclear what "cons" is in this sentence: *
> "He needs *cons* that emphasize the structure and role of the content.
> Images that accompany the main text and make it memorable also help."
>
> *Under 6.8.3 Sam Scenario 6
> <https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html#sam-scenario-3-trying-to-activate-elements-that-are-mis-recognized>,
> I was unclear what "crosses" is in this sentence:*
> "Small *crosses* become a nightmare."
>
> Thank you,
>
> Rain
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 11:10 AM Rain Michaels <rainb@google.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lisa,
>>
>> Adding a link to developer resources and then enabling the inclusion of
>> resources in more than one language sounds like the perfect plan.
>>
>> Thank you for your response!
>>
>> Rain
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:41 AM Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Rain
>>> I can put in the changes on sunday.
>>>
>>> We tried to make the bullet points consistent, but we can do a final
>>> check.
>>>
>>> we had a few links to  the 1500 most common words for
>>> different contexts. , however I would rather add a link to our
>>> developer resource page, and add it there. Is that ok? Then we can add for
>>> different languages as we find them.
>>>
>>> All the best
>>> Lisa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2021, 19:33 Rain Michaels, <rainb@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello, I'm adding a few more corrections in pull requests. Meanwhile,
>>>> here are a couple more overall comments that stand out for us to
>>>> potentially address in the future:
>>>>
>>>> User Story: Adapt is not the only place where both "easy to understand
>>>> language" (without hyphens) and "easy-to-understand language" (with
>>>> hyphens) are used. These two ways of writing this appear to be used
>>>> interchangeably throughout the document. Is this intentional?
>>>>
>>>> Design Guide is not the only section where both terms, "cognitive and
>>>> learning disabilities" and "cognitive and learning impairments" are used.
>>>> These two terms appear to be used interchangeably throughout the document.
>>>> Is this intentional?
>>>>
>>>> I've seen this comment before in a thread, but wanted to note that it
>>>> stood out in the document: list item punctuation is inconsistent
>>>> throughout. In some places, each list item ends with a period even if it is
>>>> not a complete sentence. Some areas end each item with a common, until the
>>>> second to last one which ends with "and". Other places have no punctuation
>>>> even if each list item contains a full or nearly full sentence.
>>>>
>>>> Under 4.4.1.2 What To Do:
>>>> There is a recommendation to "look at the 1500 most common words," but
>>>> this feels unhelpful without a link or resource included (I found this, but
>>>> it is English-specific: https://www.englishspeak.com/en/english-words)
>>>>
>>>> I'm more than happy to do the work of finding and correcting these
>>>> items in the code, but would need to know from the group if (1) these are
>>>> intentional, and (2) which style we would like to use.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Rain
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 5:43 PM Rain Michaels <rainb@google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am so impressed with all of the work that has been done.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the spirit of editing:
>>>>>
>>>>> I've created several pull requests on the consistency_checks branch
>>>>> with minor corrections that seemed obvious and objective.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not done going through, but wanted to make sure to send what I
>>>>> have as soon as possible. I'll try to get through the rest of the
>>>>> document tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here are a couple of comments for items that are more subjective:
>>>>>
>>>>> *3.1.2 User Story: Clear Operation*
>>>>>
>>>>> As an individual with dyslexia, the opening paragraph confused me: *"As
>>>>> a user with a memory impairment, a learning disability, or a communication
>>>>> disability who uses symbols, or executive function impairment, I find it
>>>>> hard to learn new interface design patterns. I need to know which controls
>>>>> are available and how to use them so that the site is usable for me."*
>>>>>
>>>>> I was able to follow the first three user examples, but the forth one
>>>>> ("or executive function impairment") felt like it was tacked on and didn't
>>>>> fit into the list. I spent more time than I should have re-thinking the
>>>>> sentence.
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestions to fix:
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestion 1:  put them in a list
>>>>>
>>>>> *As a user with*
>>>>>
>>>>>    - *a memory impairment*
>>>>>    - *a learning disability*
>>>>>    - *a communication disability who uses symbols*
>>>>>    - *an executive function impairment*
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestion 2: tweak the "or" and "a" usage in the sentence
>>>>>
>>>>> *As a user with a memory impairment, a learning disability, a
>>>>> communication disability who uses symbols, or an executive function
>>>>> impairment,...*
>>>>>
>>>>> *3.8.1 User Story: Adapt*
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed that sometimes the document uses "easy to understand" as
>>>>> three separate words, and sometimes we use "easy-to-understand" with
>>>>> hyphens.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a reason for the two styles?
>>>>>
>>>>> The third bullet in this section uses both:
>>>>>
>>>>> *"I need content delivered in an easy to understand language or an
>>>>> easy-to-understand mode (like short, understandable, video clips)."*
>>>>>
>>>>> *4. Design Guide*
>>>>>
>>>>> In the intro paragraph, I noticed that we used the word "cognitive and
>>>>> learning impairments" instead of "cognitive and learning disabilities,"
>>>>> which is different from the language elsewhere. Not sure if there is a
>>>>> specific reason for this, but it stands out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 8:19 AM Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Folks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We (editors) are doing the final changes from the issues to content
>>>>>> useable 1.0. However, it will still need to be reviewed, as sometimes when
>>>>>> you fix one thing you brake another (and we have a dyslexic editor...).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We will hopefully get any changes done over the weekend and send you
>>>>>> a final version to approve then. However if you have time now, and want to
>>>>>> start, it would make sense as the changes for the editors are only:  icons,
>>>>>> w3c conformance and name consistency (were we changed the pattern name to
>>>>>> update the tables and user need)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So if you do want to start the review, just ignore these items.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The edited draft is at
>>>>>> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can send any feedback to the list. Feel free to read it as HTML
>>>>>> or as a word doc or whatever makes reviewing easier for you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks so much
>>>>>> Lisall h
>>>>>>
>>>>>