Re: Accessibility Report Tool

At 03:10 PM 11/1/99 -0500, Leonard R. Kasday wrote:
>Sounds good, but I'd suggest to reverse order to give the general one first.
>
>alternatively, have one form, with the first field for general comments.  I
>think everyone would want to have that opportunity, whether or not they
>want to get technical.
>
>Then have two buttons, one that gives user an opportunity to go to the
>detailed checklist, and the other that just submits the form.
>
>or, have the technical checklist, but give a link in front of it to skip
>that checklist.
>
>Or, have a submit button under the form, plus a not that the user can skip
>that button, go to the checklist, and then submit.
>
>This is a case of something that Gregory has talked about, a form with some
>simple stuff and less used options.
>

I seem to run across this last structure in leading search sites today.
Maybe without some of the advisories about "you can go on and fine-tune
your query" but the general structure with the simple query embedded as the
head end of the complex query is what I mean.

Al

>Len
>
>, then a link that says something like
>
>At 04:13 PM 10/27/99 -0400, Wendy A Chisholm wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>If we have two forms (which I'm not opposed to) how will a user decide 
>>which one they want to use?  I think it will add one more step to the 
>>process, but if it is does well i don't think it will be a problem.
>>
>>One possibility:
>>
>>[] I want to give a technical review of the site.  Note: knowledge of HTML 
>>and WCAG required.
>>[] I want to give general feedback about the site.
>>
>>I do not know if these are the best ways to say this,but it's a start.
>>
>>thoughts?
>>--wendy
>>
>>At 11:47 AM 10/27/99 , Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:
>>>aloha, al!
>>>
>>>if the report form is already too complex for the quote average unquote
user
>>>who just wants to tell the maintainers of a site quote hey, i can't use
your
>>>site, because [fill in generalities here] unquote, then perhaps we need 2
>>>interfaces -- one for general complaints (i use speech and i can't use your
>>>site, or i use lynx and i can't get at your usenet search feature) and an
>>>advanced form for those who have more precise technical knowledge and/or a
>>>familiarity with WCAG...
>>>
>>>daniel, i can hear you shuddering at the thought, and so, if the ER-IG can 
>>>come
>>>to some consensus as to what each interface should include slash exclude, i
>>>would gladly take responsibility for encoding the form-based front ends for
>>>each...
>>>
>>>gregory.
>>>
>>>Al Gilman wrote:
>>> >This depends on who your intended audience is; who is supposed to use the
>>> >form.  On the one hand, it could be for consumers with one beef about a
>>> >particular site.  Then the idea could be to put some authoritative and
>>> >technically useful information behind the first round of "this site
should
>>> >be better!"  If that is the target audience, then the present setup is
>>> >already too busy, and the form should approximate the QuickTips in 
>>> complexity.
>>> >
>>> >Who do you imagine using the report generator form?
>>>
>>>--------------------------------------------------------
>>>He that lives on Hope, dies farting
>>>      -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1763
>>>--------------------------------------------------------
>>>Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
>>>    WebMaster and Minister of Propaganda, VICUG NYC

>>>         <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/vicug/index.html>
>>>--------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>-------
>Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
>Institute on Disabilities/UAP, and
>Department of Electrical Engineering
>Temple University
>
>Ritter Hall Annex, Room 423, Philadelphia, PA 19122
>kasday@acm.org        
>(215) 204-2247 (voice)
>(800) 750-7428 (TTY)
>

Received on Monday, 1 November 1999 17:59:42 UTC