Re: URGENT: Any more comments on Quick Tips revision?

Comment #1 (most important):  We need more QuickTips cards more than we
need better QuickTips cards.  Keep up the good work.

Comment #2 (slight improvement):  for _image maps_ where it now says

.. Use client-side MAP and text for hotspots.

replace 'and' with 'with' to have

-- Use client-side <em>map</em> with text for hotspots.

Explanation: This makes it clearer that the text is _in_ the map.

Comment #3 (slight improvement):  For _multimedia_, I would have it simply say

.. Provide captions and transcripts, and descriptions of video.

Comment #4 (slight improvement):  For hypertext links, I would have it say

.. Use text that makes sense when read out of context, not "click here."

Explanation: The concrete example does help here to establish a firm bond
with the reader; they are more sure they know what you are talking about
with the example included and they can laugh with you -- builds
empathy/rapport.  But we don't need to be quite so pedantic in marking this
as an example.  Or at least I think that the QuickTips environment is
clearly colloquial and we don't have to explicitly set off examples from
rules.

That's it from here.  Take the changes, or leave the changes, but print
more cards!

Al

At 11:32 AM 7/15/99 -0400, Judy Brewer wrote:
>Web Content Guidelines WG:
>
>If you have any comments on the Quick Tips revision, please send them to
>w3c-wai-eo@w3.org by today July 15, as mentioned in last week's request &
>list of proposed changes
><http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/1999JulSep/0040.html>. We
>have to re-order quickly because we are running out, and have a high level
>of demand for these.
>
>A few clarifications, based on comments so far: we are only trying to catch
>discrepancies between WCAG 1.0 and what's on the Quick Tips card. We can't
>add substantially to the length of this and still have this format work
>well; nor can we diverge from the WCAG 1.0 in terms of message or
>priorities, so the revision process of the Quick Tips is not the place to
>work out changes that must go through consensus discussion in WCAG.
>
>So, for instance, please look at the suggested change on "tables." If you
>think the proposed change more accurately reflects what's in the
>guidelines, let us know, and vice versa.
>
>For multimedia, if we drop the end phrase, will key meaning of WCAG 1.0 be
>lost, or was that end phrase too confusing anyway?
>
>Thanks much to the folks who've already sent comments -- Michael Muller
>(Guidelines WG) and Rob Neff and Helle Bjarnø (EOWG). You can see the
>discussion at <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/1999JulSep/>.
>We need more input.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Judy
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Judy Brewer    jbrewer@w3.org    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
>Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) International Program Office
>World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>
>WAI Education & Outreach home page: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO
>WAI EO Charter: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/charter
>EO Deliverables listing: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/EO-Deliverables

>

Received on Thursday, 15 July 1999 13:46:59 UTC