Some more comments on review page

Hello all,
Here are some more comments on the document about reviews at:
htp://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/bcase/rev.html
Regards
Sylvie

Comments:
1. Who should do the review? The web site designer or someone else 
belonging to the company/organisation.
Should he/she be trained, how, who should train him?

2. I think we should include in the preliminary review the tests with 
several graphic browsers. If the reviewer does not have several browsers at 
his disposal, he may ask someon else. Someone who has only tested his web 
site with IE and adapted it to make it run on IE may be suprised to see the 
difference when the site is displaye with Netscape or Opera.
3. I do not agree with the title of 3.
I think it is contradictory to what this review takes into account: the 
review does not only check if the web site is conformant to the WCAG, but 
it also tests the site usability.
What about site full review?

4. At the end of first paragraph of introduction of 3. "Comprehensive 
evaluations require initial downloading and/or training
on a variety of evaluation tools and approaches; and coordination with 
reviewers with a variety of disabilities." Reviewers should also have 
different skills: technical knowledge, usability knowledge, knowledge of 
assistive technologies.


5. I just discovered, in reading the document, the existence of CLAD. Is 
this tool famous around the world? Should the accronym be explained? Is 
this tool usable only for the English language or is it also usable for 
other languages? If it is only usable for English language, should the link 
be mentionned if the document serves on the international level?
Perhaps we should add (clad test available for english texts only).

6. In 4. usability evaluation:
"Note areas where it is difficult or impossible
     the use the Web site." I would write:
Note areas where it is difficult or impossible to use the Web site.

Received on Friday, 3 August 2001 06:09:44 UTC