Re: Could we add "Persona Quotes" as a standard part of the Understanding Documents for WCAG 2.1?

Hi Marc,

Yep, worth discussing later. I think Glenda had those covered, but we should be clear.

> I also noticed that the Text Spacing Understanding doc has added sections for Author responsibilities and User responsibilities.  Is this something else we need to consider for the 2.1 Understanding docs?

I think text-spacing is unusual, because there is a requirement on the user side. The only others one that fits into that is identify purpose (AAA), which John is looking at.

-Alastair


From: Marc Johlic <marc.johlic@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, 26 April 2018 at 15:28
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Cc: Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>, "laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com>, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>, WCAG List <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Could we add "Persona Quotes" as a standard part of the Understanding Documents for WCAG 2.1?

+1 to the idea overall, but would like some clarifications - perhaps we can go over this a bit more on today's call.


For example, do we want to pull the quotes as-is from Glenda's blog article with persona quotes<https://www.deque.com/blog/wcag-2-1-what-is-next-for-accessibility-guidelines/>?


Regarding the EO persona names<https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/people-use-web/stories>:  It looks like I could use "Alex" for Label in Name, but I don't see a persona over there that would work with Orientation.


Should we link to the EO persona names so that readers of the Understanding docs could get more information?


Confirming that the "Persona Quote" section will replace the "Benefits" section.



Just trying to pick the nits so that we can be consistent and get the updates done in one edit.


I also noticed that the Text Spacing Understanding doc has added sections for Author responsibilities and User responsibilities.  Is this something else we need to consider for the 2.1 Understanding docs?




-Marc


On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 7:36 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote:
Hi Michael, (and everyone, question at the end)

Just to pick up the conversation after the call, where you said:

> The advantages are obvious: the reader gains an immediate understanding of what they doing (mine) and why (Glenda's), which is often not the case from the SC language.

For consistency with the 2.0 docs I think your suggested summary statements make sense as the first sentence if you pre-pend them with “The intent of this Success Criterion (SC) is to…”

It would be a useful “polishing” exercise once we’ve got the major drafting & reviews done, I’d rather not interrupt that momentum by making changes across the various branches just yet.

I’ve added an issue for tracking, all going well, something to tackle next week:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/882


As Andrew said, there was general agreement to adding the personas to the understanding documents (perhaps with hesitation about the number of updates involved?).

As Glenda has taken that on (with help), is everyone happy with the location and format suggested? Taking Laura’s as example:
https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/text-spacing/understanding/21/text-spacing.html


Something short  & snappy like that seems appropriate, with a consistent format across the docs. Perhaps with one name only, rather than two names associated with one quote?

Cheers,

-Alastair