- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 07:19:08 -0600
- To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
- Cc: Matt Morgan-May <mattmay@adobe.com>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Roger Johansson <roger@456bereastreet.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
Hello Everyone, I went back through the public-html-a11y email on table summary thread trying to extract concerns (general and specific) [1] that may be relevant to any usability evaluation goals [2]. So far I've found: Matt's concerns [3] [4]: * Will a table summary replacement that defaults to visible not be used because it's presented visually? * What is the best way to reconcile aesthetics and data with one another? * If people are taught to write _good_ @summary values will they write _bad_ summary values? * Will people think to add a summary paragraph if they are they're not prompted to do so by a tool? * How can study data be fairly analyzed by humans who are frustratingly analog? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0003.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0008.html John's concerns [5]: * Are facts based on public available data? * What evidence is there that @summary causes *harm* to users? * Is meta-data better than no data? Ian's concerns [6] [7]: * Would a visible table summary help accessibility? * Does a hidden table summary (summary attribute) harm accessibility? * Does a hidden table summary (summary attribute) help accessibility? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0002.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0045.html Roger's concerns and criteria [8]: * Do AT users who use shortcuts to jump straight to the table miss any information if the table summary information is provided in paragraphs not explicitly associated with a table? * What is the best way for authors to satisfy stakeholders aesthetics of not having a table table summary information visible and still making a table accessible? Leif's concerns [9]: * What kind of extra table summary information is needed for accessibility? * What is the best way to add that information? * What is the feasibility of a the task force doing test? Do we have the needed resources? * Can we include authors as well as participants in studies? * Can goals be specified so everyone agrees upon them? * How do we fairly interpretable outcomes? Did I get any of this wrong? Are there additions or corrections? Are there any other concerns? I can start a brainstorming page to track this in the Wiki. My concerns are similar to those above. The biggest one is: * How can table summary be *improved*? If it is decided we want to pursue this avenue, I have some 2002 usability testing planning documents on line which may be useful. They include planning materials for usability testing goals, tasks, scenarios, measures, participants, timelines, materials etc. http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/testing/planning/ Best Regards, Laura [1] A concern is a question about usability. [2] A goal is a declarative statement resulting from a question of concern. A goal establishes an objective to measure. [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0003.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0008.html [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0004.html [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0002.html [7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0045.html [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0042.html [9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Dec/0043.html -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 8 December 2009 13:19:43 UTC