W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag-em-comments@w3.org > December 2013

[wbs] response to 'Approval for draft publication of WCAG-EM'

From: WBS Mailer on behalf of David100@sympatico.ca <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2013 03:21:01 +0000
To: David100@sympatico.ca,public-wcag-em-comments@w3.org,shadi@w3.org,e.velleman@accessibility.nl
Message-Id: <wbs-5064ac40bdd38c89ec71afdf827eda6c@cgi.w3.org>
The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'Approval for
draft publication of WCAG-EM' (public) for David MacDonald.


---------------------------------
Abstract
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * (x) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 self-assessment and third-party evaluation

Not critical: "self -assessment" seems like a one man organization... how
about "internal self-assessment"


---------------------------------
Introduction
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * (x) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 "It also defines how optional conformance claims can be made to cover
individual web pages, <add>a</add>series of web pages such as a multi-page
form, and multiple related web pages such as a website."


    Easy Checks - A First Review of Web Accessibility
<add>Involving web accessibility experts</add>
    Involving Users in Web Accessibility Evaluation
    Selecting Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools
    Using Combined Expertise to Evaluate Web Accessibility



---------------------------------
Using This Methodology
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * ( ) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 


---------------------------------
Scope of Applicability
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * ( ) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 


---------------------------------
Step 1: Define the Evaluation Scope
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * ( ) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 


---------------------------------
Step 2: Explore the Target Website
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * ( ) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 


---------------------------------
Step 3: Select a Representative Sample
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * (x) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 typo
distinctinstance 


---------------------------------
Step 4: Audit the Selected Sample
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * ( ) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * (x) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 I think there is some ambiguity between baseline WCAG conformance and good
usability/ best practices ... I know this sounds terrible, but some
organizations want to just technically pass WCAG and don't care about
accessibility... 

Although I almost always include people with disabilities in my
evaluations, and they often identifynthings that can be improved on a web
site's accessibility/usability, I rarely experience users identifying
strict WCAG failures that were not found in the "expert review". I think
this sentence could be improved to correct the ambiguity.

"Involving people with disabilities and people with aging-related
impairments helps identify additional accessibility barriers that are not
easily discovered by the evaluators alone."

How about...

"Involving people with disabilities and people with aging-related
impairments provides a clearer picture of how the site actually works with
people with disabilities, and can help identify barriers, thereby providing
a more thorough overall evaluation."



---------------------------------
Step 5: Record the Evaluation Findings
----



 * ( ) accept this section as draft
 * ( ) accept this section as draft with the following suggestions
 * ( ) I do not accept this section as draft
 * ( ) I abstain (not vote)
 

These answers were last modified on 7 December 2013 at 03:19:57 U.T.C.
by David MacDonald

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/WCAG-EM-20131129/ until 2013-12-17.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Saturday, 7 December 2013 03:21:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:55:24 UTC