Re: [media] restructuring of the requirements document

Hi everyone,

I have done the restructuring according to the proposed structure.

It has exposed that there are several gaps that we still need to fill:

* we need to add requirements lists to some of the content technologies

* we need to proof-read the system / control function sections and
possibly rewrite some of it - these also should have numbered
requirements

I might work on some of this later, but for now, the restructuring is
finalized, so go and make further changes at will now!

Cheers,
Silvia.



On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Janina,
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
>> Hi, Silvia:
>>
>> My initial reaction is that this is a great start. Just a few comments
>> below.
>>
>>
>> Silvia Pfeiffer writes:
>>>
>>> 1. Understanding the needs of sensory impaired users
>> We'll want to work on this. I don't have an immediate replacement,
>> though.
>>
>> Suffice it to say for now that we'll want to follow common language
>> usage of WAI (and other standards organizations) on this.
>
> I'd be happy to use whichever language is correct. I found it really
> difficult to come up with a good title, incidentally. So, I re-used
> language from the actual document. But how about I make the changes
> and you can then go through and correct the language afterwards? Or
> alternatively, is there a WAI page with a list of all the common terms
> to use for accessibility?
>
>
>>> 1.4 Deaf / HoH
>> May be useful to split this in two as there are significant differences.
>
> It's one paragraph right now, but I can certainly try.
>
>
>>> 2. Alternative Content Technologies
>>>
>>>
>>> 2.4 Time Scale Modification
>> Suggest this really a control, so should be in Sec. 3 below.
>
> Will do - Jim had the same feedback.
>
>>> 2.9 Content Navigation by Content Structure
>> Also suggest this as a control, so in Sec. 3 below.
>
> Same.
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> I'll start working my way through from the top, but please don't let
> that stop anyone from continuing to contribute to the document or give
> me feedback still on how it could be done better.
>
> Thanks,
> Silvia.
>

Received on Thursday, 20 May 2010 23:56:54 UTC