Re: [w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools] Update index.md (#9)

Hi Nic, Laura,

It seems you have very strong concerns about my suggested edits, which I 
can understand given that we have not had much discussion to understand 
each others' perspectives. I put some responses to help explain some of 
the rationale for my suggestions, but also suggest we try to organize a 
call or have a side meeting during TPAC if you will be there. Otherwise 
I would defer to the Chairs and Staff Contact on conflict resolution.

Regards,
   Shadi


On 25/10/2017 17:44, Nicolas Steenhout wrote:
> *@vavroom* commented on this pull request.
> 
> Made a few comments. Overall - these have to do with content 
> organization and active/passive voice.
> 
> The main thing here is that we worked hard to get to the point we were 
> at. The content was completely reorganized. I fail to understand the 
> logic behind it. But more importantly, I don't think it improves reading 
> and comprehension
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146893296>:
> 
>>  
>   ## What to Expect from Evaluations Tools
>   {:#Expect}
>   
> -Web accessibility evaluation tools can help you quickly identify potential accessibility issues. You can use them through all phases of the web design and development process. Tools can provide fully-automated checks, as well as help you with manual review.
> 
> The word "can" was very specifically added because not all evaluation 
> tools do fully-automated checks.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146893616>:
> 
>>  
>   But we cannot check all accessibility aspects automatically. Human judgement is often required. Sometimes evaluation tools can produce false or misleading results. Web accessibility evaluation tools can not *determine* accessibility, they can only *assist* in doing so.
>   
>   ## Features of Evaluation Tools
>   {:#Features}
>   
> -Web accessibility evaluation tools target different audiences. This includes designers, developers, non-technical content authors, quality assurance testers, and sometimes also end-users. Tools tend to offer different features and functionality which may help users to compare and assess Web accessibility evaluation tools for their specific needs.
> 
> Web was capitalized, as per the style guide, though I have no strong 
> objection to lowercase - which is provided for in the style guide.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146894077>:
> 
>>  
> -The following features describe tools found on the [Web Accessibility Tool List](https://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tools/).
> 
> The addition of a heading was made very specifically as a response to 
> previous comments to differentiate the features that are filterable from 
> those that are not. I feel strongly this should remain as is.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146894393>:
> 
>>  
>   * **Guidelines**
>   Different organizations and governments may require conformance with different accessibility standards, thus different tools support these standards. The W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) is internationally recognized as the standard for web accessibility, and supported by most tools.
>   
>   * **Language**
> -Evaluation tools support different languages. This includes the user interface of the tools, as well as the language of the content they support (for example for detecting language-related barriers).
> 
> This was very specifically phrased the way it was to address using an 
> active voice in writing, as per the style guide 
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Style I feel strongly this should remain 
> as is.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146894651>:
> 
>>  
>   * **Type of Tool**
> -Lists the platform and type of tools that are available, e.g. authoring tool or browser plugin, command line, desktop or mobile application.
> 
> Again, was written specifically to avoid passive voice. I feel strongly 
> this should remain.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146895060>:
> 
>>  
> -* **Supported Formats**  (referred to as "Technology" in the filters)
> -Lists the format the tool can test, e.g. HTML, CSS, PDF, etc.
> +* **Supported Formats**
> +Most evaluation tools check the accessibility of HTML content. Some also support other web technologies, such as WAI-ARIA, CSS, SVG, and PDF.
> 
> I'm happy enough with this. Except that I feel strongly about the 
> "referred to as Technology..." bit. Until the evaluation tools page is 
> modified, there could be confusion between the different terminology.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146897358>:
> 
>>  
> -### Other Features
> 
> Again, this heading was created specifically to differentiate which 
> tools are filterable and which aren't, as per feedback from the group...
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146898472>:
> 
>>  
>   * **Assists by**
> -Lists what the specific uses of the tool, e.g. generating reports, providing step-by-step guidance, or displaying information within a web page
> 
> This reflects exactly what the evaluation tools page uses for the text. 
> The changes proposed here step away from this list of features as 
> outlined on the tools page.
> 
> In fact, all the reorganization of the page's content have an impact on 
> the work @lakeen <https://github.com/lakeen> have been doing.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146898662>:
> 
>>  
> -* **Automatically Checks**
> 
> Reorganizing content - I fail to see why that was done and feel strongly 
> it should have been left the way it was.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146898745>:
> 
>>  
> -* **License**
> 
> Reorganizing content - I fail to see why that was done and feel strongly 
> it should have been left the way it was.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146898853>:
> 
>>  
> -* **Authoring Tools**
> 
> Reorganizing content - I fail to see why that was done and feel strongly 
> it should have been left the way it was.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In index.md 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#discussion_r146899044>:
> 
>>  
> -* **API**
> 
> Reorganizing content - I fail to see why that was done and feel strongly 
> it should have been left the way it was.
> 
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub 
> <https://github.com/w3c/wai-selecting-eval-tools/pull/9#pullrequestreview-71903785>, 
> or mute the thread 
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHCrscnGlYy8yrxuBHzJvA4vrqyAj_tvks5sv1dBgaJpZM4P6QqC>.
> 

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Received on Wednesday, 25 October 2017 23:11:53 UTC