- From: Tom Croucher <tom.croucher@sunderland.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 15:29:34 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> > Agreed > You don't want a comprehensive set of personae. Too many. >Gregg > > No. By definition we're not trying for maximum inclusion; personae are > models. We merely need a reasonable cross-section of WCAG 2.0 target > groups. Personae are an adjunct to other methods of usability testing and > are not the sole such method. If you leave a certain category out of > personae, you can test for usability for that category elsewhere. > > Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org Sorry Gents, That is usually the model for personae, but in this case I disagree. I think we should treat personae like use cases in this instance. A personae does not actually have to be an actual abstract person a generalised demongraphic can act as the personae. I think we just need to be aware of all the possible problems PwDs have, and we need to be checking that we are either fulfilling them or not and justifying both cases. This might be controversial. However I think it is the most honest way to address the QA issue. How can we be sure we have actually addressed PwDs' needs unless we have formally specified them for comparison with what the guidelines address? Tom
Received on Friday, 19 March 2004 10:34:01 UTC