Re: comments on section 4

I wonder if a slightly different slant on 4.1.1 vs. 4.1.2 might not help us
The installation is given priority 1 and the documentation priority 2.
What I might suggest as in scope at priority 1 is not all documentation,
but not just installation.  Perhaps 4.1.1 should include all things
necessary to begin basic use, including installation and any orientation or
basic training required to start use. 

The product may think it is self-explanatory; this is open to validation by
user testing.


At 12:28 PM 2/23/99 -0600, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>In the discussion at the December Face-to-face meeting these exact
>arguements were presented in defence of documentation accessibility issue
>being a priority 1.  I don't know of anybody in the working group that
>doesn't think that accessible documentation is not important.  The
>consensus of the group on level 2 was based on based on the following idea.  
>If a company was chosing between making the documentation more accessible
>and adding improved keyboard support, what would you want the developer to
>do?  If both are priority 1 then to the developer they are equally
>important.  So we want to limit the priority 1 to items that are most
>critical for implementations.  In most cases the user can still use the
>user agent even if the documentation is not completely accessible.
>Remember a priority 2 still indicates very difficult, while priority 1
>means impossible.
>The issue is closed and can only be reopened if new information is provided
>to the group on why the status should be changed.  You can review the
>discussion of the the F2F meeting at:
>Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
>Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
>Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
>University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
>1207 S. Oak Street
>Champaign, IL 61820
>Voice: 217-244-5870
>Fax: 217-333-0248

Received on Tuesday, 23 February 1999 21:40:31 UTC