Re: [wbs] response to 'EOWG Survey - Showcase Examples February 2016'

Hi Susan,

Thanks a lot for reviewing the scripts and for your comments. Please 
find a few questions and clarifications inline below:


On 8.2.2016 22:48, Susan Hewitt via WBS Mailer wrote:
> The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'EOWG Survey -
> Showcase Examples February 2016' (Education and Outreach Working Group) for
> Susan Hewitt.
>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 1: Video Captions
>> ----
>> Please review Script 1: Video Captions and add any comments in GitHub as
>> new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> I assume AD is going to be scripted later? (comment applies to all
> scripts.)

Yes - This will be set once we settle the visuals and the narration.


>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 2: Color Contrast
>> ----
>> Please review Script 2: Color Contrast and add any comments in GitHub as
>> new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> no comment
>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 3: Voice Recognition
>> ----
>> Please review Script 3: Voice Recognition and add any comments in GitHub
>> as new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> Scene 1 is confusing. I had to read it a couple of times to understand how
> it connects to the topic but I worry viewers won't have the time or
> attention to do so.
>
> It's confusing because it implies the purpose of having speech is saving
> time but the need for voice recognition is not for the benefit of time
> saved. I would have to think on it a bit to come up with a suggestion to
> replace it but I strongly feel this is not a good lead-in concept.

Maybe we could turn this around to something like "imagine you could use 
your computer through voice rather than by typing"? We would have 
similar visuals where people first communicate by typing then through 
voice, but with a different message. Would that address your concern?


> Also switch the order of the visuals in scene four to the person using the
> computer by typing and then the scene turning into the same person with a
> cast now using voice recognition.

One of the issues is that using voice is not really all that easy. We do 
not want to suggest that one can simply switch to voice only. By using 
different people, there is less of such an implication. What do you 
think, would it be acceptable to keep this as-is?


>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 4: Text to Speech
>> ----
>> Please review Script 4: Text to Speech and add any comments in GitHub as
>> new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> Suggest changing "especially in terms of audience " in first scene to
> "especially when visually reading text is difficult because of an
> impairment" or similar. "Audience" doesn't seem very clear to me.

I agree that this is potentially confusing. However, the more text we 
add, the more the viewer has to read (in a short time). How about we 
just remove that last part "especially in terms of audience"?


> Also, perhaps we can switch the gender of the actors to a woman sitting in
> an office and a man doing the washing? It might seem a minor thing to some
> but that kind of representation goes far for others.

Do you mean gender balance altogether (which we certainly consider - 
also ethnic diversity) or are you suggesting a female person for this 
particular video? Note that we also have a "mum" in this video. The 
gender of the other characters is not yet defined (left to casting).



>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 5: Layout and Design
>> ----
>> Please review Script 5: Layout and Design and add any comments in GitHub
>> as new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> no comments
>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 6: Notifications and Feedback
>> ----
>> Please review Script 6: Notifications and Feedback and add any comments
>> in GitHub as new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with
>> GitHub, please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> no comments
> -
>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 7: Large Click Areas
>> ----
>> Please review Script 7: Large Click Areas and add any comments in GitHub
>> as new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> I'm not certain about the needle/needle threader. A needle threader seems
> like a tool to compensate for the small needle eye, not an actual fix.
> Granted, you can't really enlarge the size of a needle eye (without using a
> different type of needle) but that analogy doesn't seem to apply to a web
> situation that requires something to be built properly.
>
> Other possible idea:
> -Filling out a paper form with tiny spaces to write. The person then goes
> to an online version of the form and finds it has tiny click sizes for
> buttons, checkboxes or the like.

I like this idea of a paper form with tiny space for writing versus a 
web-based form with tiny controls. Let's see what others think of it.


>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 8: Text Customization
>> ----
>> Please review Script 8: Text Customization and add any comments in GitHub
>> as new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> no comments
>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 9: Simple Language
>> ----
>> Please review Script 9: Simple Language and add any comments in GitHub as
>> new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub,
>> please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> Suggestion for scene 3:
>
> A complicated form seems more applicable to consistent layout than
> language. Maybe he should pull up a recipe that's full of jargon and
> unexplained acronyms. This would match the narration for that scene and
> overall subject better.

The focus here is on the instructions of forms, which are often way too 
complicated. Would it address your concern if we changed the visuals to 
"but the instructions on the online form are very complicated"?


>> ---------------------------------
>> Script 10: Keyboard Compatibility
>> ----
>> Please review Script 10: Keyboard Compatibility and add any comments in
>> GitHub as new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with
>> GitHub, please add your comments below.
>>
>
>   * (x) I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
>   * ( ) I didn't get to it; I will pass on commenting on the document and
> accept the decisions of the Group.
>
> Change scene one to match the fifth. Having a window that doesn't open
> won't prevent you from driving a car nor is it related to the type of
> transmission. Maybe in the first scene for some reason they can't operate
> the shift stick - they don't know how, it's stuck, or they have some sort
> of physical limitation.

Thank you for spotting this inconsistency - we spun around on that a few 
times. Thinking of it, I'm not sure the transmission idea works very 
well either - the issue needs to be inherent to the car rather than the 
driver. Maybe "image you couldn't use the car because you can't adjust 
the seat"? This also has the notion of adaptation and personalization of 
products. Let's also discuss this one further.


>> These answers were last modified on 8 February 2016 at 21:47:38 U.T.C.
>> by Susan Hewitt
>>
> Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/EOWG-ShowcaseExamples3/ until
> 2016-02-10.
>
>   Regards,
>
>   The Automatic WBS Mailer

Thanks a lot,
   Shadi


-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, WAI International Program Office
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)

Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2016 12:59:42 UTC