W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: List of BAD features - for discussion this Friday 26 August, 2005

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@teleservicios.es>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 10:40:13 +0200
To: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Message-ID: <opsv3w1beex03efm@0032k2d.e-fti.com>

I think that it would be much more useful if there was a list of  
accessibility errors / features, and a WCAG cross-reference. It would  
enable users to find an example of what they are looking for. I think that  
many users will not want to study the entire site, but will start with an  
idea of what they need. During development this would also help to keep  
track of what is demonstrated and where.

Perhaps another useful feature would be a set of tasks for people to try,  
like usability test tasks. For example (but in more detail), "try using a  
text browser to find jazz concert ticket information" or "disable style  
sheets and try to read the news items."

A small and unobtrusive but distinctive icon (with suitably distinctive  
alt text) could be placed next to each element to allow the user to jump  
to a description of its features.

In the start page, the section "Accessibility talk" seems like an  
innovative way to incorporate the technical information into the same  
page. I think the style could be the same as that in the rest of the page,  
as if it was just another article, another piece of content. I understand  
that the idea is that the site designer gets to discuss the accessibility  
of the page on the page itself. It needs to be done very carefully as its  
quite unexpected. Maybe it should be just a short lead into a more  
detailed treatment in another linked page. "Designer says: 'When I was  
designing the page it seemed OK, but people keep complaining that they  
can't...'". Another format might be a "Post your comments here" section,  
with comments from disabled users complaining about the problems they've  
found, like "I'm blind and I use a screen reader, and I can't figure out  
which headline goes with which story."

I have been looking at the University of the Antarctic site by WebAIM  
(www.webaim.org/uofa/) a "mock Web site with intentional accessibility  
errors" although there doesn't seem to be any explanation, just the site.  
In one place (screen reader simulation) I found tasks using it.

best regards,

Alan Chuter
Fundosa Teleservicios
Tel. +34 91 1210335

En Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:48:42 +0200, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>  

> Dear EOWG,
> For discussion this Friday 26 August, 2005:
> Draft Demo: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/>
> Features: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/features>
> Please find a list of accessibility barriers addressed by the Before and  
> After Demo (BAD) site. Some of these features are already implemented in  
> this first draft of the demo, others are to be implemented soon.
> Do not focus on the visual design or the page content just yet, we will  
> be working on these in the coming weeks. At this stage, the BAD task  
> force would like feedback on the list of features. Specifically, we  
> would like to know if we captured the most common barriers, or barriers  
> with significant impact that are effective to demonstrate.
> Regards,
>   Shadi
Received on Friday, 26 August 2005 08:40:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:38 UTC