- From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:13:20 +0100
- To: Isabelle Motte <isabelle.motte@fundp.ac.be>
- CC: public-wai-age@w3.org
Hi Isabelle, Thank you for your feedback. We have looked into thos idea in the past but it proved to be very difficult for several reasons: - who evaluates the Web sites in question? - how do we guarantee that they do not change? - how do we maintain such an idea scalable? The Demo attempts to provide a selection of realistic examples from many of the Web sites we encounter. Please let us know if you have specific suggestions on making the Demo less academic and more usable for you (or if you volunteer to organize an award and maintain a list of accessible and best-practice Web sites *wink*). Best, Shadi Isabelle Motte wrote: > I am a web developper and I am quite reluctant about this "academic" example > that do not provide an actual content. > > Why not to propose a list of "sexy" accessible web sites that could inspire > the web developpers ? A special honorific prize could even be organized ... > > Isabelle > > > > Le Friday 10 October 2008 10:38:54 Shadi Abou-Zahra, vous avez écrit : >> Hi Michael, >> >> Thank you for your comments. Many of these are about the coding so let's >> discuss them when we implement the changes. For now, we need to identify >> any functional changes to the Demo that would better highlight that WCAG >> also improves the user experience for older people. >> >> Do you have specific thoughts about the types of accessibility barriers >> that we should further include in the Demo? >> >> Regards, >> Shadi >> >> Michael Stenitzer wrote: >>> dear all, >>> >>> a bit late my additional comments on the before and after demo >>> (no claim to be complete): >>> >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/index >>> >>> * teasers in right column: link the headline, make the whole teaser >>> clickable with progressive enhancement techniques, inkl. hover-effects >>> (CSS,JS) >>> >>> rationale: >>> - increase clickable areas. >>> - make areas clickable that might be expected to be links. >>> - indicate clickability with visual effects. >>> >>> * drop-down nav in the header (quick menu): >>> rationale: i don't see any reason for this. it is a mere duplication >>> of the main navigation and needs much more fine motor skills (and >>> clicks) than ordinary links. it actually hides information instead of >>> providing additional link opportunities. >>> >>> if you want to show an accessible drop-down-menu make it more useful: >>> different links, more links (thats actually the reason why we use >>> those items), consider a collapsed UL with progressive enhancement or >>> eg. make the quicknav a ordinary list of links and place it somewhere >>> else, eg. in the footer like many websites do it nowadays. >>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/info >>> >>> * increase / improve use of whitespace >>> rationale: distinction of unrelated information. increase readability. >>> >>> eg. around the table in the bottom, >>> before and after the headings - some are closer to the previous >>> paragraphs than to the next ones. >>> >>> the image boxes are positioned in a way that it is visually not clear >>> that they belong to the regarding sections. (they are wrongly aligned, >>> at least in firefox) >>> >>> >>> * improve legibility of copy. split into several paragraphs and maybe >>> use lists. >>> >>> rationale: increase readability and scan-ability of text. >>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/data >>> >>> * reorder page structure for better understanding of the page. >>> split Frank Zappa and Thelonius Mank (nice selection, BTW!) into >>> separate sections. >>> >>> * increase whitespace, do not use nested lists inline but make them real >>> nested lists (in the T&C section) >>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/form >>> >>> * link logo to the home >>> >>> * link the teaser images in a consistent manner (compared to home) >>> >>> * reconsider LEGEND elements' length >>> rationale: screenreaders will read the legend with every label in the >>> fieldset. is might be annoying. >>> >>> * consider using a visually more unobstrusive but still accessible >>> technique. >>> >>> * consider increasing size of comment-box >>> use a textarea for "other reason"? >>> >>> * reconsider text and form of "Rank your favourite forms of >>> transportation" in section 2. >>> >>> - i'm not a native speaker, but i think a ranking should bring those >>> items in an order? >>> >>> - consider using a different form than drop-downs, maybe radiobuttons >>> as they are generally easier to use (single click)? >>> >>> * ??? aren't numbers (1,2,3) generally easier to read and understand >>> than the words (one, two, three). maybe this is only true for bigger >>> numbers. >>> >>> * increase and visually emphasize the submit button. >>> i generally have the feeling the a reset button is useless in 99% of >>> the cases and every useless element should be dropped(TM). >>> >>> >>> * Footer: provide a TITLE for KEIO to indicate what this might be. it's >>> not that famous among ordinary users ;-) >>> >>> >>> >>> gerneral comments on the presentation of BAD: >>> >>> * make a tab-interface for good and bad (would be easier to understand >>> and to handle) >>> >>> * make a slideshow-like before & next page navigation >>> >>> * make major barriers & improvements toggle-able (whats the right >>> word?): maybe those comments could be positioned in lightboxes in the >>> margin? >>> >>> * crosslink barrieres to WCAG and maybe to our comparative analysis >>> >>> >>> i hope that helps for the first, >>> regards, michael > > > -- Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ | WAI International Program Office Activity Lead | W3C Evaluation & Repair Tools Working Group Chair |
Received on Monday, 27 October 2008 13:14:01 UTC