W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2013

RE: Tutorials review for this week

From: Bim Egan <bim@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 14:13:54 +0100
To: <sylvie.duchateau@snv.jussieu.fr>
Cc: "'EOWG \(E-mail\)'" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2A0A2E21DD5D4DC1A98A097FAC76F94F@bimlaptop>
Hi Sylvie and all,

Many thanks for your comments, don't worry about putting them on the Wiki
page, for me email is easier, but I'll get the Wiki page updated for those
who prefer to use that, and put your comments in as I'm doing it.



      -----Original Message-----
      From: Sylvie Duchateau [mailto:sylvie.duchateau@snv.jussieu.fr] 
      Sent: 20 June 2013 11:37
      To: Bim Egan
      Cc: 'EOWG (E-mail)'
      Subject: Re: Tutorials review for this week
      Hello Bim and all,
      As I will have no time to look at this topic later today, 
      I prefer replying to your email directly in the message 
      below. I can add these in a wiki if necessary tomorrow morning.
      My responses are marked with SD.
      Le 19/06/2013 19:45, Bim Egan a écrit :
      > At this stage, areas that we would like you to focus on are:
      > 1. How do these drafts work for different roles?
      > For example
      > * If you were a developer, is this engaging enough for 
      you to read?
      SD: Each page is short and precise, so I think it would 
      be ok for a developer who needs to check rapidly what he 
      can do to make accessible tables or images, for example.
      > * If you were a trainer, is it organized in a way you can use?
      SD: As a trainer, I particularly like the images part. I 
      think it would be easy to use.
      > * If you were non-technical, for instance a student, is 
      it understandable?
      SD: As a non technical reader, I also would prefer the 
      way the images tutorial is presented. The tables one is a 
      bit technical.
      > 2. We need to reconsider what these should be called. 
      Can we have 
      > another brainstorm for other possibilities?
      SD: For me tutorials was fine, but OK for another brainstorming.
      > 3. Currently we're using two different approaches. 
      Please compare the 
      > overall approach used in the tables vs the images 
      tutorials. Pages to 
      > focus
      > on:
      > Images:
      > http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/app-notes/images/
      > http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/app-notes/images/functional
      > Tables:
      > http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/app-notes/tables/
      > http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/app-notes/tables/th-caption
      SD: I prefer the images approach. It sounds clearer to me.
      > 4. How can we make it clearer that each topic covers 
      multiple web pages?
      SD: what about writing this in this intro page: 
      > 5. Each page has links to more info in WCAG. How can we 
      present these 
      > so they don't detract from people progressing through 
      the other pages 
      > in each topic?
      SD: I don't understand this question. Could you explain 
      more what you mean?
      Finally, I have one comment for the main page:
      Carousel is a link in the list of tutorials. You find it 
      also "carousels" in the planned tutorials. Is it the same topic?
      > Kind regards,
      > Bim
      Sylvie Duchateau
      Association BrailleNet
      Tél.: +33 (0) 1 44 27 26 25 / Fax : +33 (0) 1 44 27 34 38 
      www.braillenet.org / www.accessiweb.org
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 13:14:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:47 UTC