- From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 07:26:40 -0500
- To: Peter Thiessen <peterdev001@gmail.com>, Yeliz Yesilada <yyeliz@metu.edu.tr>, Simon Harper <Simon.Harper@manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: RDWG <public-wai-rd@w3.org>
I also think it would be good to have a short, strong, clear introduction for the main page (which we will also use for the announcements). There is some text in the beginning of http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile_Accessibility_Call that I suggest be refined to be cleaner and included in the main page. Regards, ~Shawn On 3/20/2012 7:24 PM, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote: > Hi Peter, Yeliz, and Simon, > > Thank you for continuing to work on the Mobile Accessibility call. It looks much clearer now. Below are some comments on the current drafts: > > > http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile_Accessibility_Call > - I think Jeanne has raised this before but the template sections listed in section "Contributing" does not seem to match the call text, especially where it says "this symposium aims to bring researchers and practitioners together to scope the extent and magnitude of existing mobile accessibility [...] We specifically seek reports and guides". Having "the problem they tried to solve" after that just seems like a mismatch to me. > - Minor: I think this same list of template section needs some editorial refinement, it does not read as well as the rest of the text. > > > http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile > - The section "Background" seems quite thrown together. It needs some editorial work to get a better flow and grammar. In particular, please continue the sentence lengths, I already got lost in the first. Also, it seems that there are several points being made at the same time and they may need to be separated out and more clearly explained each. > - Consider separating out the questions listed in the "Objectives" section into its own section. It is quite a dense (but a useful) list and confuses the section. Maybe a sub-heading? > - Also, The first paragraph of the "Objectives" section seems to have similar issues to the "Background" section (flow, complexity, grammar, and sentence lengths). It may be useful to break out the inline list into a bulleted list, as this may also help readability and skimming. > > > Regards, > Shadi >
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 12:26:56 UTC