Re: Revision of Validation (Testing) Section

eric hansen wrote:
> 
> Following is a revision of the Validation (Testing) section. It has a
> slimmer intro and adds a few methods.

Thank you Eric. I like a lot of the suggested edits. Below are
my edits to your suggested methods:
 
> 8. Use spell and grammar checkers. A person reading a page with a speech
> synthesizer may not be able to decipher the synthesizer's best guess for a
> word with a spelling error. Eliminating grammar problems increases
> comprehension. {EH: Changed to add grammar checker, since it is often found
> with a spell checker.}

Fine.
 
> 9. Edit for clarity and simplicity. {EH: or "Evaluate for clarity and
> simplicity"} A good human editor can help ensure clarity and simplicity of
> written content. An editor can also increase the usability of documents by
> identifying potential problems such as cultural and ethnic stereotyping or
> offensive language{EH: I think that it is fine to mention these usability
> issues.}.{EH: I think that the use of a good editor (or other human judge)
> is the best way of validating clarity and simplicity.}
> 
> 10.   Examine readability statistics. Readability statistics, such as those
> generated by some word processor programs {EH: e.g., MS Word}, may be
> useful indicators of clarity and simplicity. {EH: New and easily done.}

I propose merging 9. and 10. into something like:

Review structure and content for clarity and simplicity.
Readability statistics, such as those generated by some word
processors may be useful indicators of clarity and simplicity.  Better
still, ask an experienced (human) editor to review written content for
clarity. Editors can also improve the usability of documents by
identifying intercultural problems that might arise due to language or
icon usage.


> 11. Involve people with disabilities as evaluators. Observe and obtain
> feedback from expert and novice users with disabilities. Evaluators with
> disabilities can identify accessibility and usability problems and rate
> their severity. Involving evaluators with disabilities will yield insights
> for improving the accessibility of Web designs.{EH: or delete "and
> usability"}{EH: I believe that the absence of this point would be a serious
> oversight.}

Proposed rewrite:

   Invite people with disabilities to review your documents.  Expert
   and novice users with disabilities will provide valuable feedback
   about accessibility or usability problems and their severity.

 - Ian

-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) 
Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 
http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs

Received on Saturday, 13 March 1999 17:14:11 UTC