Re: CFC - Publish WCAG 3.0 as FPWD

+1

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 25, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Karen Schriver <kschriver@earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> Charles, thank you for forwarding the Forbes article on plain language. I agree with the author (Andrew Pulrang’s) point that plain language "should contain the same complex ideas and content expressed in a more accessible way, rather than removing ideas until things seem more simple…. Plain Language isn’t about reducing the number of facts and ideas expressed, but rather explaining them in ways more people can readily understand."
> 
> Unfortunately, most of his ideas for revising text for plain language focus on plain words rather than on how to express ideas in readily understandable ways.
> 
> Still it is a very useful article to help spread word about the need for plain language.
> 
> I agree with your point about the need to revise the first point in the abstract. I like your revision, but I would make one change. The last clause, 
>> and people with intersections of any of these.”
> needs to flow from “situations and contexts.” It’s the “with intersections” that could be improved.  You might say
> 
>    “and people whose needs intersect any of these."
> 
> Kind regards,
> Karen 
>  
> Karen Schriver, PhD
> KSA Communication Design & Research, Inc.
> www.karenschriverassociates.com
> 
> 412.828.8791 office
> 412.245.6781 mobile
> 
>> On Oct 24, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Charles Hall <hallmediamobile@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I agree that user research is more acceptable here, although it usually describes research conducted on a problem space prior to a design solution. The term “user testing” is simply an unfortunate misnomer from the conflation of user research and usability testing.
>> 
>> A really good, widely accepted, and simple explanation of this comes from Whitney Quesenberry in User research and evaluation: 
>> 
>> “Do you know what your users really want? Or how they actually use your products? User research at the start of the project is the key to understanding how to design a user experience people will love using.
>> 
>> Once your project is under way, usability testing - with real people - is the best way to make sure your design is on track. In the field, in the lab, on the phone, self-directed.”
>> _____
>> 
>> Regarding the first point on the abstract, I am specifically referring to the following sentence:
>> “Following these guidelines will address many of the needs of users with blindness, low vision and other vision impairments; deafness and hearing loss; limited movement and dexterity; speech disabilities; sensory disorders; cognitive and learning disabilities; and combinations of these.”
>> 
>> Grammatically, I find some of the conjunctions and punctuation result in unintended pairings, like “limited movement and dexterity” – which implies a person is limited in both. But the larger concerns are the inconsistent use of broad terms like impairment, disability, disorder, and limitation, as well as the omission of needs that are temporary, situational, contextual, or compounded.
>> 
>> Suggested edit to that sentence:
>> “Following these guidelines will help address many of the functional needs of: people with a wide range of permanent and temporary disabilities; people experiencing difficult situations and contexts; and people with intersections of any of these.”
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Charles Hall
>> 
>> Senior Accessibility Designer
>> Invited Expert, W3C AGWG & Silver TF
>> Chair, W3C IDIW CG
>> Member, Ferndale Accessibility & Inclusion Advisory Commission
>> 
>>> On Oct 24, 2020, at 3:09 PM, Sarah Horton <sarah.horton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I agree with Charles about the term “user testing.” “User research” would be a better descriptor of studies and evaluations that involve people.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Sarah
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 24, 2020, at 5:49 PM, Rachael Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Charles,
>>>> 
>>>> Can you provide more details and suggested corrections for your first point? 
>>>> 
>>>> Regarding user testing, the taskforce changed the term from usability testing to user testing to indicate a wide range of tests can be used including heuristic tests, formal usability testing, etc. 
>>>> 
>>>> I need to look further into the other points.
>>>> 
>>>> Rachael 
>>>> On Oct 24, 2020, 11:50 AM -0400, Charles Hall <hallmediamobile@gmail.com>, wrote:
>>>>> +1
>>>>> 
>>>>> I consent that there are no items that I am not ‘able to live with’.
>>>>> However, there are many that I would prefer to see edited.
>>>>> Apologies for missing deadlines from previous surveys, but here are a brief few:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Use of certain disability language and named disabilities in the Abstract.
>>>>> Use of the term “fallback” to describe methods that are intended to be enhancements or forward looking.
>>>>> Use of the term “user testing” to describe usability testing. (We don’t test users. We test things through the participation of users)
>>>>> Some sections are understandably still blank, but some that are not have omissions, like E.1 references WCAG 2.0 and 2.2, but not 2.1.
>>>>> A select few instances of describing Functional Categories and Functional Needs, which I will address separately.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Charles Hall
>>>>> 
>>>>> Senior Accessibility Designer
>>>>> Invited Expert, W3C AGWG & Silver TF
>>>>> Chair, W3C IDIW CG
>>>>> Member, Ferndale Accessibility & Inclusion Advisory Commission
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Oct 23, 2020, at 1:38 PM, Rachael Bradley Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Call For Consensus — ends Friday October 30th at 2:00 pm Boston time.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> The Working Group and Silver Taskforce have discussed publishing W3C Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 3.0 as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD). 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> The document is at: https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/ 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Call minutes: 
>>>>>> 1 September AGWG & Silver Meeting Minutes
>>>>>> 15 September AGWG & Silver Meeting Minutes
>>>>>> 6 October AGWG & Silver Meeting Minutes
>>>>>> 20 October AGWG & Silver Meeting Minutes
>>>>>> Changes are viewable through the diffs at https://github.com/w3c/silver/commits/master/guidelines/index.html 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Rachael
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Rachael Montgomery, PhD
>>>>>> Director, Accessible Community
>>>>>> rachael@accessiblecommunity.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "I will paint this day with laughter; 
>>>>>> I will frame this night in song." 
>>>>>>  - Og Mandino
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>