Re: Feedback on: Tips on Designing for Web Accessibility

Thanks tons for the feedback, Mark! It is very helpful and exactly what I was hoping you could provide. (See, I told you. ;-)

*About the clutter*:

Some EOWG participants have the same issue (including me :). We put the "On this page" list at the top to try to help address that.

One idea we had was to provide expand-collapse on the headings. (some people like this idea and some people do not :) For example, see <http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/preliminary#using> We considered having [+] just on the main headings, or on the Examples and Learn More headings. What are your thoughts on that expand-collapse functionality?

Do you have any other suggestions for addressing the clutter issue?

[Kevin, probably we need to re-open that issue in GitHub.]

*About the scale*:

We intend for this to be a resource for getting started, not a comprehensive guide. If you want more background on that, you can read the Requirements Analysis at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Quick_Start_Guides/Requirements_Analysis>

We are working on adding wording to better communicate that this is just for getting started, and not comprehensive. We might come back to you for your feedback on that wording. :)

Also note we have a different resource to help people find specific techniques, at: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/> A current EOWG project is to redesign that and add functionality; the in-progress prototype is at: <http://w3c.github.io/wai-wcag-quickref/8>.

Links to that resource are throughout the Tips for Designing page after
"Learn more
WCAG Requirement: _link_"
While the in-progress draft is in GitHub, those links don't work. However, you can get to them by following the link and then on the 404 page, in the URI (web address), change "w3c.github.io" to "w3.org"-- e.g.:
change:	http://w3c.github.io/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#qr-text-equiv-all
to:		http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#qr-text-equiv-all

*About the inaccessible color example*:

EOWG discussed quite a bit whether or not to have the inaccessible color examples. Some people felt strongly that including the inaccessible examples would make the issue much more clear. (e.g., "I think using the inaccessible as well as the accessible example is important. I look at the inaccessible and say, nothing wrong with that, the right answer is blue, no problem. Then reading the explanation the light goes on and it is powerful. I love how this was put together and think it is just perfect." in the minutes at <http://www.w3.org/2015/07/10-eo-minutes.html#item01>) We decided to leave it for that reason.

*About staged-model of expertise development*:

We do not currently provide that; however, something like that is on our wishlist of things that we would like to develop. Currently we have other things that are higher priority, but we have noted your suggestions.

fyi, Here are two places that I suggest people start:
* Accessibility introduction <http://www.w3.org/standards/webdesign/accessibility>
* Accessibility Principles <http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/people-use-web/principles>

Thanks again for the input!

Best,
~Shawn


On 7/14/2015 1:51 PM, Mark Weiler wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> I’m new here and spoke with Shawn last week. I’m an academic librarian from Canada. Shawn invited me to provide some comments on the following:
>
> Tips on Designing for Web Accessibility: http://w3c.github.io/wai-quick-start/designing.html
>
> Here are a few comments…
>
> I liked that there were user stories, supportive tools, background information, and some “how to.”  The reason I like this is because it provides a mix of human meaning (the story – but the links are broken) and  instrumental information, both of which are relevant.   Having tools listed (although the link is broken) is valuable because tools can make development easier.
>
> I liked having examples of the techniques being described. What I noticed, however, is that the majority of examples seemed to have an Accessible Example but only the color contrast had an Inaccessible Example.  For consistency,  I think just having Accessible Examples would be enough.
>
> A concern I have … are there plans for it to scale?  I’ve gone through WCAG 2.0 and found it has hundreds of general/html/css/aria/etc.  techniques to integrate accessibility and meet the WCAG criteria.
>
> I also found the page cluttered and so my attention was pulled in many directions while I was looking for its flow. I rendered the page to show just the Heading outline and the structure became much more clear.
>
> Stepping back from this specific page,  one of the things I’m curious about is does the group have a staged-model of expertise development? That is, what are some of the development stages people often go through when becoming skilled in designing for web accessibility?  This does not necessarily have to be on the webpage, but what a developmental map can do is help understand the stages or thresholds of becoming skilled. I imagine having beginner, intermediate, advanced, etc. stages helps in educational planning and resource development.
>
> For example, a developer at stage 1 might not be aware of any specialized tools or features of technologies to support accessible development.  A more advanced developer might have a range of tools and extensions installed to support their development work.  An more advanced user yet might have the most popular assistive technologies to test on. Likewise, a stage 1 developer might be guided by common but unhelpful assumptions that more advance developers have relinquished. A problem of being a novice is that it’s hard to know what one doesn’t know.  Developmental maps help chart a course.
>
> Mark
>

Received on Friday, 17 July 2015 20:25:05 UTC