- From: Roger Hudson <rhudson@usability.com.au>
- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:44:42 +1100
- To: "'Karl Groves'" <karl@karlgroves.com>, "'David Woolley'" <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Cc: "'WAI Group'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "'Meliha Yenilmez'" <melihayenilmez@yahoo.com>
I agree with Karl, great if we could do all this but it doesn't happen in practice very often. I looked at the pros and cons of conformance reviews and user testing with people with disabilities in the blog post 'Measuring Accessibility' at the end of last year - http://www.dingoaccess.com/accessibility/measuring-accessibility/ Roger -----Original Message----- From: karlgroves@gmail.com [mailto:karlgroves@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Karl Groves Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2012 10:10 AM To: David Woolley Cc: WAI Group; Meliha Yenilmez Subject: Re: approval On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:02 PM, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk> wrote: > To find out if it is actually accessible, you need to find people with lots > of different disabilities and perform a usability survey on them, allowing > them to use their own browsers and any assistive technology that they use. Do you do this? Really? With all due respect, this is exactly the type of attitude that perpetuates the impression that accessibility is nebulous, expensive, and difficult. It would be wonderful to be able to test with real users, but such a thing is often not feasible due to time, budget, or resource constraints. Considering the other types of testing available that can be used to gather accessibility data, doing usability testing should be reserved for cases where other test approaches (that are often quicker, cheaper, and easier anyway) have already been utilized. Karl
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 01:46:33 UTC