Re: [wbs] response to 'Scripts for Evaluation Intro Videos'

Hi Eric,


On 02/09/2019 18:48, Eric Eggert wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2019, at 17:04, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> 
>     Hi Eric,
> 
>     Many thanks for your comments on the video scripts! I'm processing
>     the comments and have a few questions for you:
> 
> 
>     On 27/08/2019 10:48, Eric Eggert via WBS Mailer wrote:
> 
>         I think this video is too long and introduces too many resources.
> 
>     This was in relation to the first (overview) video. Which resources
>     would you suggest excluding from this video?

Not sure if you missed my question to you?


>             Illustrations of "users"/"people" appear (do not need to be
>             detailed or
> 
>         animated); *no* representations of "disability" or such - just
>         of users
>         (see sequence 21 of video 1)
> 
>         STRONGLY OBJECT to not representing disabilities when talking
>         about users.
>         We need not to point out disabilities specifics here, but
>         whenever we refer
>         to users we must make sure to be representative.
> 
>         When I think of “just users”, I cannot separate PwD from people
>         without
>         disabilities. They are all “just users”.
> 
>     To clarify, I'm worried about how people with disabilities would be
>     depicted -- wheelchair or cane? What about non-visible disabilities?
>     Would such representation reinforce the thought that is work is for
>     disabled people only? My suggestion is to try and not differentiate
>     between disabled and non-disabled but just depict "end-users". These
>     include people of different abilities, race, age, etc. Remember that
>     these will all be illustrations anyway, rather than actual people.
> 
>     Curious about your thoughts after this clarification.
> 
> Hm, the initial says “/no/ representations of "disability" or such” but 
> now you say “My suggestion is to try and not differentiate between 
> disabled and non-disabled but just depict "end-users". These include 
> people of different abilities, race, age, etc.”
> 
> If that means disabilities are represented, then I’m ok with it.

The suggestion is to not attempt to depict age, race, ability etc. but 
only depict "users". I'm thinking of something like this illustration, 
which doesn't allude to any particular person:
  - 
https://cdn4.vectorstock.com/i/1000x1000/86/93/classic-3d-board-game-figures-graphics-vector-22798693.jpg


>         See video 1, also there seems to be a lot of repetition from
>         video 1. I’d
>         like to have this more stand alone.
> 
>     This seems a little contradictory. To make each video stand-alone
>     there needs to be some level of (slight) repetition. Unless we avoid
>     an intro (overview) video altogether?
> 
> Hard to see where my comment relates to due to truncation, I think the 
> videos should be distinctive. I felt like they were covering largely the 
> same ground with some changes in the details.

Here are the objectives for each video:
  - 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Video-Based_Resources/Evaluation_Introduction#Objectives

Video 1 is an overview, and the others go into more detail about more 
specific aspects introduced in Video 1. This means there will be some 
level of repetition between Video 1 and the other videos, unless we 
decide to change the approach (for example, to remove Video 1).


>         Could we not throw shade like that? [...]
> 
>     [...]
> 
>         This is throwing experts under the bus [...]
> 
>     I do not mean to throw shade or throw anyone under anything. I'm
>     very happy to consider your comments, also without such pointy
>     statements.
> 
> I have tried to convey the impression I got as directly as possible, and 
> I had those “pointy” reactions at those points in the scripts.
> 
> I did not want to imply that both points were meant intentional, but 
> that the phrasing has a negative impact.

Thank you, I will try to address your comments.


Thanks,
   Shadi


> Eric
> 
>     Many thanks,
>     Shadi
> 
>     -- 
>     Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
>     Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
>     Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
>     World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
> 
> --
> 
> Eric Eggert
> Web Accessibility Specialist
> Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
> 

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2019 05:55:09 UTC