- From: Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:47:22 +0200
- To: WSTF <public-wai-eo-site@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <B9910715-F00D-4EB4-BB29-B14403D65E0C@w3.org>
Hi All, This is the last call for comments on the new IA as discussed in the Meeting today. We want to discuss it in our meeting next Wednesday (July 19, 2017). **If you have any major thoughts, please comment by next Monday (July 17, 2017)** to allow Charlotte and Shawn to think about them. (If you don’t have comments, it is totally OK to not comment, we don’t expect comments from everyone on this.) I have attached the Excel sheet again. Best, Eric On 12 Jul 2017, at 14:44, Eric Eggert wrote: > I don’t know if I am supposed to comment, but here are a few minor > thoughts: > > 1. I think archiving is OK for most of the things that Charlotte and > James pointed out. It would not go away, but it would be clear that we > don’t actively work on it. That is OK. (Archiving = Leave as it is, > not link to it from the navigation or any existing resource, unless > qualified as “here is some additional archived content” where > it’s really, really needed.) > > 2. I think the 221 – WAI Projects – is necessary for transparency. > It might also be helpful to generate new projects (= funding). I think > however that we might be able to have one page or a section in about > WAI that talks about those projects and why they have been successes. > Then we could link to the archive (especially for all the real old > projects). > > 3. I think it is entirely okay to strip everything from the new page > that has a 1.0 in it. The content can still be found in the archives, > and we can have a sidebar box on the new site that says “Still using > WCAG 1.0 and want to switch? See this archived content over here!” > > This approach underlines that WCAG 2.x is now the current version > and that they are behind. I think we’d get some (minor learning > effect, too). > > Apart from the points above, I leave it to others; I think every > single page we don’t have will make it easier for us to keep the > page updated and useful for our users. > > Eric > > On 8 Jul 2017, at 19:55, Shawn Henry wrote: > >> Updated spreadsheet attached, includes some input from Shadi (SAZ). >> >> *Note*: I only added comments in one column. I did not change any of >> the others -- so there are some that are marked archive and obsolete, >> that should not be. >> >> ~Shawn >> >> On 7/5/2017 4:21 PM, Shawn Henry wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I've done a first round of comments -- not comprehensive, but I >>> think important for Charlotte, James, Sharron, Brent, and all to >>> have for planning next steps. >>> >>> In the attached file, my comments are in the Comments column >>> preceded with SLH: >>> >>> Best, >>> ~Shawn >>> >>> >>> On 7/1/2017 1:07 AM, Green, James wrote: >>>> Hey All, >>>> >>>> Here is everything for y'all to review prior to bringing it to the >>>> TF and WG. Charlotte and I met whenever we could over the last few >>>> weeks so we are mostly in agreement, but it has evolved since she's >>>> seen it last so I expect she may have some feedback as well. >>>> >>>> I've attached PDF, XLS, and HTML versions of the new IA (the PDF >>>> has a bit more info but you'll need to zoom in to see it). This >>>> captures the new IA for your review. Every item has a number or >>>> the word "New" in parenthesis after it. Those numbers map to the >>>> XLS mentioned below for traceability back to the current sitemap. >>>> The cross-links you'll see in the PDF are mostly there to allow us >>>> to have 2 paths to content that different personas would seek >>>> differently. E.g., a Tips for Getting Started page in the newbie >>>> section used to be the Tips for Design, Writing, Dev landing page, >>>> but will be fleshed out more for beginners and include links to >>>> more info that lives in other sections, where it should actually >>>> live given our role-based mental model. Likewise, newbies will >>>> want to know about Mobile, and we'll then cross-link to specifics >>>> about mobile in the role-based sections. Last example, designers >>>> and developers would expect to find the quick ref in their >>>> sections, so we provide links from their sections to its real home >>>> with the TRs. >>>> >>>> WAI Sitemap to New IA.xls shows the old sitemap and my >>>> recommendation for every single page – keep, edit, retire, >>>> archive, rename, tersify, merge, etc… AFAIK, this accounts for >>>> all of Charlotte's communications with Shawn and Sharron regarding >>>> what to do with content…This captures what must be done to get >>>> our content ready for the new site for your review. >>>> >>>> I also mocked up a screen grab of Alicia's design to show how the >>>> top level nav would look – just for a quick feel. >>>> >>>> Hope this email makes sense – it's been a long day…. :) >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> James >>>> >>>> *James Green *|Sr. Director, Visa User Experience, Research & >>>> Accessibility >>>> >>>> O512.865.2051 |M 512.650.6959 | E jgreen@visa.com >>>> <mailto:jgreen@visa.com> >>>> > > > > -- > > Eric Eggert > Web Accessibility Specialist > Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) -- Eric Eggert Web Accessibility Specialist Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Attachments
- application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet attachment: WAI_Sitemap_to_New_IA_-_SLH_comments_v2.xlsx
Received on Wednesday, 12 July 2017 17:47:32 UTC