W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > April 2019

Re: Proposal for new version of Requirement 3.7 Motivation

From: Denis Boudreau <denis.boudreau@deque.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:31:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CAC=s1AhGK5NW7UwCHw8KsDT+QZ4XNgyAh7C45_Q5+S2KCpycqQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Sahasrabudhe, Shrirang P" <ssahasrabudhe@ets.org>
Cc: Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>, "public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>
+1 to that.

/Denis


*Denis Boudreau, CPWA* | Principal Accessibility SME & Training Lead
| 514-730-9168
Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good
Deque.com <http://www.deque.com>





On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:12 AM Sahasrabudhe, Shrirang P <
ssahasrabudhe@ets.org> wrote:

> I like the idea "we could consider pairing aspects of the usability
> testing sessions with tangible results or improvements that came directly
> from this testing. That way, the testing outcomes and related improvements
> could be linked to specific methods for instance, or techniques or what
> not, and we could measure just how many of the improvements came directly
> from involving end users with disabilities in the overall process."
>
> We should try to go beyond the technical methods and should include some
> guidance on the quality processes to be followed. Not all the findings of
> user testing can always be incorporated due to various technical and
> organizational factors. Therefore, the organizations can be rewarded for
> documenting the findings of the user testing and the subsequent actions
> they took to improve the accessibility of their product. The documentation
> can help the organization to clearly assess their process maturity level.
> It will also help adhering to the WCAG standards in a more systematic way.
>
>
>
> *From:* Denis Boudreau [mailto:denis.boudreau@deque.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 9, 2019 7:58 AM
> *To:* Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> *Cc:* public-silver@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Proposal for new version of Requirement 3.7 Motivtion
>
>
>
> I like the proposal with Chuck’s edits.
>
>
>
> I disagree with your position Detlev, but understand your concerns. The
> temptation to game the system would undoubtedly rise from some of the
> people out there that would want to be able to claim a quick path to
> success (oh yeah, we tested with people, and “they” said it was
> fiiiiiiine...).
>
>
>
> I’m just not able to agree with a statement such as:
>
>
>
> “[testing]... does not in itself change the quality of the site under
> test. An awful site stays awful even after a lot of user testing.”
>
>
>
> I believe that conducting testing with people with disabilities, when done
> genuinely with the goal of user experience improvements does absolutely
> change the quality of the site under test. The findings brought up by
> consulting those users is expected to bring forth positive changes. An
> awful site is supposed to get better as a result of the change that come
> from the activity of involving those users in the process. That’s just the
> nature of the activity. But we need a way to measure that clearly in Silver.
>
>
>
> I celebrate our vision of rewarding usability testing with end users with
> disabilities. It does expose our model to abuse - I certainly share
> Detlev’s concerns here - but I’m sure that as we get to defining the
> details of how the scoring system will pan out, we’ll find ways to reward
> usability testing for aspects that actually provide value, not for things
> that pay lip service to the idea of making the product or service
> accessible.
>
>
>
> As an example, we could consider pairing aspects of the usability testing
> sessions with tangible results or improvements that came directly from this
> testing. That way, the testing outcomes and related improvements could be
> linked to specific methods for instance, or techniques or whatnot, and we
> could measure just how many of the improvements came directly from
> involving end users with disabilities in the overall process. The more
> improvements came out direct end users contributions, the higher the points.
>
>
>
>
>
> /Denis
>
>
>
> —
>
> Denis Boudreau
>
> Principal accessibility SME & Training lead
>
> Deque Systems, Inc.
>
> 514-730-9168
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 04:30 Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> wrote:
>
> As I have said before, I think the mere fact that testing with users
> with disabilities has taken place should not be rewarded since it does
> not in itself change the quality of the site under test. An awful site
> stays awful even after a lot of user testing. If then, as a result of
> such testing, the accessibility and/or usability is improved, that
> should impact also the conformance to measurable criteria (whether
> absolute or score-based) - and I am happy to see those criteria extended
> to realms so far difficult to measure.
>
> Am 08.04.2019 um 20:42 schrieb Jeanne Spellman:
> > Here is the proposal for revision of Requirement 3.7 Motivation as
> > requested by AGWG to make it measureable.
> >
> > Motivation
> >
> > The Guidelines motivate organizations to go beyond minimal
> > accessibility requirements by providing a scoring system that rewards
> > organizations that demonstrate a greater effort to improve
> > accessibility.  For example, Methods that go beyond the minimum (such
> > as: Methods for Guidelines that are not included in WCAG 2.x A or AA,
> > task-completion evalations, or testing with users with disabilities)
> > are worth more points in the scoring system.
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Detlev Fischer
> Testkreis
> Werderstr. 34, 20144 Hamburg
>
> Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45
>
> http://www.testkreis.de
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.testkreis.de&data=02%7C01%7CSSAHASRABUDHE%40ets.org%7C903b55c752544a3ba41c08d6bce2d0c5%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636904079699835430&sdata=gg%2F3WMQzvPG2yzgxHbAQ%2FCUjg6qgEJd%2BbXS%2Bgsx27XU%3D&reserved=0>
> Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites
>
> --
>
> /Denis
>
> --
> Denis Boudreau
> Principal SME & trainer
> Web accessibility, inclusive design and UX
> Deque Systems inc.
> 514-730-9168
>
> Keep in touch: @dboudreau
>
> ------------------------------
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
> ------------------------------
>
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2019 13:32:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:45 UTC