W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2006

RE: Evalutation Tools List, suggestions

From: Helle BjarnÝ <hbj@visinfo.dk>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 11:52:41 +0100
Message-ID: <48E9FBE6442A6040BE44D6C11258A8B07FAF@VFSSBS01.vfs.local>
To: <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Cc: <shadi@w3.org>

I think we have come a long way with this list and the possibilities it provides in selecting and understanding evaluation tools.
I agree with Justin and Alan about the clarity of the search/select options in simple Search. When I just opened the page imagining myself being new to this and just been told from some "expert" that besides e.g. the AIS toolbar I can go to this site and use the simple search to find other tools I think I will be rather confused by the criteria I can choose from. If I go to the "Selecting web Accessibility Evaluation tools" and try to find the definition/explanation for "web technologies" I get:

"Skills and knowledge of the Web developers
Some evaluation tools require users to have more knowledge of accessibility requirements or mark-up code (such as HTML, CSS, ...) than others. Also, some evaluation tools can support Web developers in learning such skills differently than others. It is important to identify the intended tool users and their requirements when selecting appropriate evaluation tools for a specific organization."

And in another section I find this explanation for Platforms:

"Integration: How well does the evaluation tool integrate into the Web development environment of the users? 
Platform support 
Even though some evaluation tools may be available on more than one platform (hardware, operating system, and system configuration), they may sometimes not support the same features or perform equally on all platforms. It is important to ensure that the required tool features are supported on the platform where it will be deployed."

In chapter 2 in the Getting started section we say:

"Before using the list of evaluation tools, please read the "Selecting Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools" document, which describes features of evaluation tools and the categories in the tools list."

To me this means that I can jump to a description of all the search fields and get an explanation e.g. like in an online Library catalogue I can find an explanation for all the search fields if I click on Author: it says something like: if you know the author's name write it here ... 
I don't see this direct explanation of the select criteria in neither the simple search nor the advanced search. Apart from this I also think we have to find some easier to understand names for the categories.
I would like to see the select criteria names as links to an explanation/definition of this criterion.
Cheers
Helle

Sincerely
Helle BjarnÝ
Visual Impairment Knowledge Centre
Rymarksvej 1, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark
Phone: +45 39 46 01 01
fax: +45 39 61 94 14
e-mail hbj@visinfo.dk
Direct phone: +45 39 46 01 04
Mobile: +45 20 43 43 47
www.visinfo.dk
www.euroaccessibility.org 
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Alan Chuter
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 8:18 AM
To: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Cc: shadi@w3.org
Subject: Re: Evalutation Tools List, suggestions


Hello again to the group after my prolonged absence.

On the Simple Search form, the list of languages is longer than on the 
Advanced one. I think it should be the other way around. I don't think 
Brazilian is a language; perhaps in the final version the options will 
be restricted to values present in the database.

I agree with Justin (what I think he implies) that the difference 
between HTML and XHTML is not useful. It would neeed some explanation 
about what it means. Does it mean that the page is validated as XHTML?

"Languages" whould perhaps specify "Interface languages". As Justin 
points out about "Web Technologies", perhaps it needs explaining somewhere.

I think it is important to link from the form to the "Selecting Web 
Accessibility Evaluation Tools" page, as criteria like "User Interfaces" 
and "Functionality" are very difficult to understand otherwise.

Spidering: I think that this is a useful criterion, and essential for 
large-scale evaluations, but it itsn't mentioned. It's also important to 
know when links are in Flash content or PDF rather than HTML.

I hope to be on the call today to discuss this.

best regards,

Alan

-- 
Alan Chuter
Accessibility Consultant,
Technosite (formerly Fundosa Teleservicios)
achuter@technosite.es
www.technosite.es
Tel. +34 91 121 03 35




Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> 
> Dear Group,
> 
> Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/tools/>
> 
> Please find an updated draft of the "Evaluation Tools List". It 
> incorporates most changes discussed during previous discussions and 
> should be fairly complete. For tomorrow's discussion we would like to 
> identify any remaining issues to finalize this work.
> 
> Note: this is only the static mock-up for the design of the tool 
> interface. The ERT Working Group is currently compiling the database 
> information and a working prototype of the tool is expected soon.
> 
> Regards,
>  Shadi
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 3 February 2006 10:50:59 UTC

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