- From: Matt May <mcmay@bestkungfu.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:03:23 -0800
- To: "Robert Neff" <rneff@bbnow.net>, "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>, "WAI" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
My observations: - I think the "requirements and scope" line item Robert brought up goes before brainstorming, and it includes audience (intended and potential) and the constraints of the system. If WAI is publishing this, it also needs to convey the message that you need to set the bar for accessibility and standards compliance before you start even high-level design. I can't emphasize this enough: it's an order of magnitude more difficult to make sites usable, accessible and standards-compliant with each step that's completed without answering these questions. - "Content" may belong anywhere (or everywhere, or nowhere) in this flow. Content provision could happen before the site is designed (legacy content), at any step in the process (e.g., media sites), or even after the site is released (data entry apps). The information architecture that accommodates that belongs in scope/brainstorming/storyboarding (but no later). - Usability testing isn't a step, but an iterative process. (And I'm pretty sure I'm not saying this so I as a usability person can get more work. ;) If I were following this flow, I'd run usability on paper mock-ups after storybook, again after prototype, alongside testing, and after release. - I think "Release" should be a step in there, as well. Preferably before "Promote", though there are companies I've seen who believe otherwise. :) - I'm reluctant to put down too much practical (specifically, large team-oriented) information into a flow such as this, because it would look daunting to smaller design teams ("you must be THIS BIG to make an accessible site"). One person can design something that's accessible, and I'd hate to scare that one person off by saying s/he needs to hire an information architect, development resources, QA, project managers, and usability consultants, and buy a content management system, automated testing suite, and four staging servers in order to make myquiltingpage.com accessible. This kind of checklist would be helpful for larger organizations, but I think that if it's done, it belongs as its own document, rather than part of the intro; that there should be a miniaturized version for smaller teams or individuals; and that an introduction for web design should be written to accommodate both those groups. - m ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Neff To: Lisa Seeman ; WAI Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 8:20 AM Subject: RE: process of a site development Would add define requirements and scope where this will discuss the players, functionality, infrastructure, software and hardware. Define deliverables for example, functional specification, test requirements, quality assurance requirements, change request process Define configuration management and file release process either make a make a separate bullet for quality assurance or add a slash to Testing and couple it there -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Seeman Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 4:45 PM To: WAI Subject: process of a site development Here is a preliminary draft of a some type of diagram for Jason's introduction to the guidelines. We intend to discuss the process of a site development and were accessibility can be incorporated into this process. Try to imagine this as a flow diagram. Please add omissions comments..... Cycle of Development: (flow down) Brainstorm Storybook Prototype Content Testing Usability testing Promote Evaluate Maintain Areas of Development: ( flow in parallel) Server Side: Programming, scripting and installation Client or Sever Side: Graphical, text and semantic content (data models), page design/layout, markup, coding, scripting, formalization of languages, templates, style sheets and rendering information, coordination.
Received on Friday, 26 January 2001 14:03:28 UTC