- From: Andi Snow-Weaver <andisnow@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 14:33:05 -0500
- To: "David MacDonald" <befree@magma.ca>
- Cc: public-wcag-teamc@w3.org
David, In reference to your comments regarding general techniques we might want to add to our GL 2.5 Level 2 SC 1 guide doc from last week: <david> (1) Make error messages easy to understand and distinguishable from other text on the delivery unit. </david> We discussed this but because it has to do with understandability, we thought it belonged with GL 3.1. <david> (2) Do not use the same words or letter combinations to begin each item of the list. </david> This technique is about helping users to avoid making mistakes in the first place. But it doesn't fit this success criteria which is specifically about providing messages when the user has made an error. <david> (3) Identify which fields are required. </david> I think this one belongs under Level 3 SC 1 as additional context relevant help. <david> (4) Provide clear instructions on forms. </david> Again, this is about helping users avoid mistakes for which we currently have no success criteria. We considered proposing a success criteria for instructions, data format, etc. But we were unable to articulate an "accessibility" rationale to support it. Everyone needs this for usability. What is it about having a disability that makes this more critical to provide? <david> (5) Provide feedback for user actions. </david> I think Katie took a work item on this. We think it is a good thing to do but again, everyone needs it for usability. What is it about having a disability that makes this more critical to provide? Andi andisnow@us.ibm.com IBM Accessibility Center (512) 838-9903, http://www.ibm.com/able Internal Tie Line 678-9903, http://w3.austin.ibm.com/~snsinfo
Received on Monday, 3 October 2005 19:33:16 UTC