- From: Wayne Dick <wed@csulb.edu>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:20:33 -0700
- To: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
• WAI-AGE slide set (9 June 2009) a.Overall impressions? ---The difference between and link between accessibility and adaptive strategy/assistive technology is unclear. Suggestion: Add the following bullet to the slide “Additional Observations” after the bullet on lack of technical knowledge • Many imply adaptation must be is part of web content --- Demographics slides - graph vs. table vs. both? --Both work … I think for many people, even among people without disabilities some prefer graphics and others prefer text. c. Impairment slides - does putting impact & statistics on the same slide work? (Was previously organized as separate slides for impacts and for statistics. --- Yes the impact and statistics go well together. b. In the notes for Vision Loss define, “Significant sight loss in the UK is estimated using <6/18 as a measure of visual acuity”. Should this be <=6/18? Should you include the phrase ‘uncorrectable’? What about reduced visual arc bigger than legal blindness? d. Does the Implications slide work as a transition from the preceding background to the remaining slides about the project and its findings? --- Perhaps change “lifelong learning is encouraged” to “…expected”. That motivates the “Web accessibility is imperative” claim. e. Any suggestions for clearer slide headings? Additional --- The headings work for me.
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2009 04:21:04 UTC