- From: phoenixl <phoenixl@sonic.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 20:52:25 -0700
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi, I believe this is getting into design concepts. Basically, the web page designer is trying to fulfill some purpose with a web page. A user is using the web page to fulfill a purpose too. Basically, the developer does testing to be sure that the web page is achieving the purpose the developer has in mind. Learnability is often considered a usability issue. Is it also an accessibility issue? When does a usability issue become an accessibility issue? Scott > Just to add a few more comments (or possibly re-add the same comments ...): > > At 05:14 PM 5/28/2002, phoenixl wrote: > >Hi, > > > >The issue of "getting it right" is an interesting one, but it is not > >clear exactly what it means since various people and organizations have > >different interpretations. > > > >With regards to web page accessibility, I contacted hisoftware and found > >out their software doesn't address a number of the issues of "understanding". > >When we were doing some web page testing, some of the questions that blind > >people were asked were like: > > > > 1. What is the purpose of the web page being presented? > > > > 2. How do you know you are correctly interpreting the purpose of > > the web page? > Who decides what the "real" purpose of the page is? If the designer is on > hand (or if you designed a test page), then you have a good chance of being > sure what the page is for. But this still may not agree with what most > users think the page is for, or ought to be for. Some pages have one > specific purpose, & should have as little distracting material as possible > (a purchase completion page). Other pages (a university or supermarket > homepage) may need to offer something to a wide range of users with > different interests. > > So it may be better to frame the questions in terms of user expectations, > esp. since few people will ever be presented with a web page out of thin > air. They are either typing in an address, following a link recommended by > a friend, or following a link from a previous web page. In all these cases > the user has some expectation of what will happen when the new page loads. > So the question might be: What were you expecting to find on the page? Were > you able to find it? What unexpected things occurred? Did they distract or > help you in finding what you wanted? You might also compare the confusion > level of the novice blind user with the confusion level of a novice sighted > user. (My hunch is that there won't be very many "intuitively obvious" > pages without some level of training/experience.) > > Another area that studies, particularly of blind users tend not to address > is the learning curve issue. It may take even an experienced blind web user > a long time to understand a new site, esp. if it uses unfamiliar navigation > or other layout features. But after the structure of the page is learned, > return visits can go much faster. So if I know that the link I want is the > third one that starts with R, I simply load the page, use the Link List > command, type R R R & hit Enter (for example purposes only). So I may > actually get to the desired content faster than a darkness-impaired user in > some cases. > > This is where things like frames become issues. Blind users (& many others > with & without disabilities) work best in familiar navigational structures. > When the metaphor for the page design changes (it's a Windows dialog box; > it's like a spreadsheet for you to fill in numbers), or new elements are > added (pop-out menus, etc), these are confusing until learned. So, if a > user has to continually learn new page metaphors, his/her efficiency will > be decreased. (Of course many web authors are constantly seeking new page > designs to differentiate themselves from the competition, so this will > always be an issue.) > > My rambling shall cease, > Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 23:53:03 UTC