Re: agenda+ Re: Draft material for usability testing

> ​Eric, I don't think the testers will have W3C accounts.​

Oh, sure, but I guess Charlotte or Shawn could log in (I don’t know if 
it happens on one computer or if testers bring their own).

Eric

On 7 Sep 2017, at 19:52, Bakken, Brent wrote:

> >
>> ​
>> On 7 Sep 2017, at 17:55, Shawn Henry wrote:
>
>
> On 9/6/2017 9:46 AM, Eric Eggert wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Shawn,
>>>
>>> On 6 Sep 2017, at 16:35, Shawn Henry wrote:
>>>
>>> Additional question for Charlotte: What level of info for the UT? 
>>> e.g.,
>>>> on specific resources? or only on nav, general design, type stuff?
>>>>
>>>> On 9/5/2017 3:07 PM, Shawn Henry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Charlotte and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> We have a few questions and issues related to draft material for
>>>>> usability testing (UT). We plan to have the navigation and 
>>>>> resource titles
>>>>> done, but most of the revised content probably will not be 
>>>>> finalized and
>>>>> approved by EOWG before UT. I'm assuming that the site for 
>>>>> usability
>>>>> testing will not be public, and so we don't need to be as 
>>>>> concerned with
>>>>> unapproved material being included. I wanted to confirm that, and 
>>>>> also make
>>>>> sure we cover related issues.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it correct that the only people who will see the content used 
>>>>> in UT
>>>>> are the test participants and the people who prepare and 
>>>>> participate in the
>>>>> test (e.g., observers)?
>>>>>
>>>>> We will want to mark unapproved content as draft, yet in a way 
>>>>> that
>>>>> won't interfere with UT. If it was to be public, we would have big 
>>>>> notice
>>>>> at the top. I think we don't want that. I think clear indication 
>>>>> in the
>>>>> document footer area is enough. Let us know if you have any 
>>>>> thoughts on
>>>>> this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Brent helped me realize the site for UT will probably have to be 
>>>> public
>>>> for UT. Right now I'm thinking that before and after the UT we'll 
>>>> have big
>>>> banner at top saying draft - and move that to the bottom during UT. 
>>>> Can we
>>>> check in on that briefly in today's meeting?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I will make sure that there will be a way to display the website 
>>> without
>>> a banner for the UT.
>>>
>>
>> In yesterday's meeting, Charlotte suggested password protect.
>>
>> My guess is that's hard to do.
>>
>> Happy to leave it up to you, Eric.
>>
>
> I can upload a version to w3.org and hide it behind a W3C login so you 
> can
>> only see it with a W3C account. The other idea is to provide the page 
>> in a
>> private GitHub repository and remove the banners from there so 
>> you’d need
>> to know the URL to find it (of course locking out search engines).​
>>
>
> ​Eric, I don't think the testers will have W3C accounts.​
>
>
>
> Brent A. Bakken
> Director, Accessibility Strategy & Education Services
> Pearson
>
> 512 202 1087
> brent.bakken@pearson.com
>
> Learn more at pearson.com
>
> [image: Pearson]
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 7 Sep 2017, at 17:55, Shawn Henry wrote:
>>
>> On 9/6/2017 9:46 AM, Eric Eggert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Shawn,
>>>>
>>>> On 6 Sep 2017, at 16:35, Shawn Henry wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Additional question for Charlotte: What level of info for the UT? 
>>>> e.g.,
>>>>> on specific resources? or only on nav, general design, type stuff?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/5/2017 3:07 PM, Shawn Henry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Charlotte and all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have a few questions and issues related to draft material for
>>>>>> usability testing (UT). We plan to have the navigation and 
>>>>>> resource titles
>>>>>> done, but most of the revised content probably will not be 
>>>>>> finalized and
>>>>>> approved by EOWG before UT. I'm assuming that the site for 
>>>>>> usability
>>>>>> testing will not be public, and so we don't need to be as 
>>>>>> concerned with
>>>>>> unapproved material being included. I wanted to confirm that, and 
>>>>>> also make
>>>>>> sure we cover related issues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it correct that the only people who will see the content used 
>>>>>> in UT
>>>>>> are the test participants and the people who prepare and 
>>>>>> participate in the
>>>>>> test (e.g., observers)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We will want to mark unapproved content as draft, yet in a way 
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> won't interfere with UT. If it was to be public, we would have 
>>>>>> big notice
>>>>>> at the top. I think we don't want that. I think clear indication 
>>>>>> in the
>>>>>> document footer area is enough. Let us know if you have any 
>>>>>> thoughts on
>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Brent helped me realize the site for UT will probably have to be 
>>>>> public
>>>>> for UT. Right now I'm thinking that before and after the UT we'll 
>>>>> have big
>>>>> banner at top saying draft - and move that to the bottom during 
>>>>> UT. Can we
>>>>> check in on that briefly in today's meeting?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will make sure that there will be a way to display the website 
>>>> without
>>>> a banner for the UT.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In yesterday's meeting, Charlotte suggested password protect.
>>>
>>> My guess is that's hard to do.
>>>
>>> Happy to leave it up to you, Eric.
>>>
>>
>> I can upload a version to w3.org and hide it behind a W3C login so 
>> you
>> can only see it with a W3C account. The other idea is to provide the 
>> page
>> in a private GitHub repository and remove the banners from there so 
>> you’d
>> need to know the URL to find it (of course locking out search 
>> engines).
>>
>> Both is equally complicated but not a huge burden.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>> ~Shawn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Eric
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> ~Shawn
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> What about dates for content changes? We see:
>>>>>>      * Final prototype or interface due: 18 September
>>>>>>      * Test-the-test: 28 September
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We hope to have the navigation and resource titles set for UT by 
>>>>>> 18
>>>>>> Sept.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it OK to make content changes after 18 Sept as long as we tell 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> beforehand that they are planned, and then when we make the 
>>>>>> changes? Is it
>>>>>> correct that we shouldn't make any changes after, say, 26 Sept?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>> ~Shawn
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> 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)
>>
>>
>>