W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > October to December 2020

RE: Advisory Techniques followup

From: Andrew Arch <andrew@intopia.digital>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 00:30:35 +0000
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>, Hidde de Vries <hidde@w3.org>, "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ME4P282MB1095496453BB3A36DD80544CC1050@ME4P282MB1095.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Hi Shawn,

I agree that some judicial bolding may assist. Also wondering about
* changing "suggested ways" to "potential ways" (especially given some of the bullets)
* adding in a note that they should be tested with users

Andrew Arch
Principal Accessibility Consultant, Intopia
p: +61 (0)447 389 137 | t: @Intopia  @amja

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> 
Sent: Saturday, 10 October 2020 2:09 AM
To: Hidde de Vries <hidde@w3.org>; EOWG (E-mail) <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Subject: Advisory Techniques followup


In followup on the brief discussion on Advisory Techniques, please see:


which says:
Advisory techniques are suggested ways to improve accessibility. They are often very helpful to some users, and may be the only way that some users can access some types of content.

Advisory techniques are not designated as sufficient techniques for various reasons such as:
	* ...

Authors are encouraged to apply all of the techniques where appropriate to best address the widest range of users' needs.

I think the bullets get most people's attention, and the sentences are lost for some. Thus, the interpretation can be opposite of what is intended.

I wonder if bolding some words in the sentences might help?


Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2020 00:30:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 14 October 2020 00:31:01 UTC