Re: Idea for positive reinforcement checklist

At 17:18 1998/10/13 -0400, Ian wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Today I mentioned an idea for a kind of accessibility checklist
>that could be offered by the Tool to the Author. The checklist
>would present key topics of accessibility (identified by these
>guidelines) and indicate which ones the author had satisfied through
>some mechanism (e.g., a check mark). Those that were not yet satisfied
>would be unchecked. For those not yet satisfied, the Author
>could follow links to information about how to satisfy them.
>
Also a chain of links to each detected problem of that kind.

>The idea here is to provide a mechanism that:
>
>1) Isn't a spell-check-like mechanism for highlighting
>   accessibility problems in the document body (this is also useful,     
>   but a separate mechanism). The checks could be "calculated" 
>   after the Author has finished an editing session.
>

>2) Gives Authors an introduction to accessibility topics (a checklist 
> of 10 or so might even stick in people's minds).
>
The WAI summary business card we're currently finalizing has 9 items on it.

>3) Gives Authors a starting point to finding more info about topics
>
>4) Gives positive feedback ("You *have* done a good job for these
>topics").
>
I note that recent Bobby 3.0 admits that some accessibility issues
require human judgement. Should we handle such subjective issues by
raising them and having the author assert fulfillment?
>
> - Ian
>
>-- 
>Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) 
>Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 
>http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>

Received on Wednesday, 14 October 1998 00:48:28 UTC