review of re: WCAG curriculum


WOW - a lot of work has gone into the curriculum! it looks great!

I have not been keeping up with the reviews of the curriculum and apologize if
my comments duplicate others.

1.  slide 8 (Introduction Usage: in a classroom setting) links to "background
on the W3C and WAI."  Instead of linking to it, since the reader will arrive
there in a few slides, that it ought to say (slides 13-n).  Otherwise, the
reader may skip slides 9-12 or be confused when they end up back at 13.

wo/spn.htm (link from slide 9) is 404.

3.  slide 10 - when you refer to "curricula use" (slide 8) - perhaps say that
it is slide 8 so that people don't have to hop to it and back again without
thinking it is something new.

/wai/three/overgid.htm is awesome.  i didn't see this at first and was
overwhelmed. i'm glad there is a toc like this.

5. i like that guideline slides are one color, checkpoints another, and
examples another.  

However, it didn't help me maintain orientation as well as i had originally
thought! <grin>  I got confused after i followed the link "checkpoints for
guideline 1" towards the bottom of the slide for guideline one (in the
Guideline stack).  I had pressed "next" a couple times and realized, once i
to a page that i knew had nothing to do with guideline 1, that i wasn't
at the next guideline, i was looking at the next checkpoint.  

It took me a while to realize that once I started down a checkpoint path (by
pressing the next button) that I was only in "checkpoint land."  I think part
of the confusion came from the title "checkpoint.  1. provide ...".   In the
example slides the title is, "example for <BR> <x.y checkpoint text>." a
similar model for checkpoint might be "checkpoint for <br> <x. guideline

6. slide 90 of the example stack has some strange positoning going on.  The
middle and right form groups were overlapping when i first went to the page. 
if i increase the width of the browser they are all right, but definitely
closer together than the left and center form groups.

7.  slide 100 of example stack:  not only should we be emphasizing that people
want to use more complex boolean searches, but that if someone does not spell
well (either because of a learning disability or the language of the search is
not their primary language), a spell checker or some sort of choice of words
could be provided if an entered word was not found.  there are a variety of
search strategies that people have discussed that  ought to be highlighted (to
spark some innovation!).

8. slide 106 of example stack ought to be updated once consensus is reached
the QED/learning disabilities thread. 

9.  there are several slides that seem pretty long.  They most likely will not
display on a single page when projected.  Not sure if this is a concern or
but you might want to split some of those up. ??  Just a thought.

10.  there are a few slides where the "slide x of y" is not directly over the
nav buttons as it is on most slides.

11.  there are a few slides (e.g., Guideline slide #10 - where the text differs from
WCAG1.0.  I believe this is text that existed before going to Rec.  If not,
there places were an interpretation of a guideline/checkpoint is made to make
the concept clear?  If so, please point these out so we can incorporate them
into the next release (some time far in the future <grin>).

excellent work! i think these will be helpful to people.


wendy chisholm
human factors engineer
trace research and development center
university of wisconsin - madison, USA

Received on Monday, 21 June 1999 17:15:26 UTC