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

Hi Shadi,

On 9/16/2019 10:34 AM, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> Hi Shawn,
> 
> 
> On 16/09/2019 17:24, Shawn Henry wrote:
>> Hi Shadi,
>>
>> On 9/16/2019 1:37 AM, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
>>> Hi Shawn,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13/09/2019 17:30, Shawn Henry wrote:
>>>> Thanks, Shadi!
>>>>
>>>> replies below:
>>>>
>>>> On 9/12/2019 11:06 PM, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
>>>>> Hi Shawn,
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks for your extensive and helpful comments. I addressed most of them in the latest update. Some issues are on the agenda for discussion. Below are some responses to specific comments:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 13/09/2019 03:27, Shawn Henry via WBS Mailer wrote:
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>>>>> Video 1: Evaluation Overview
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>> 6: "Even if you are new to web accessibility and non-technical…"
>>>>>> -> "Even if you are new to web accessibility and not technical…"
>>>>>> Also, I wonder about "new to accessibility"? … so maybe:
>>>>>> -> "Even if you don't know anything about web accessibility yet and you're
>>>>>> not technical…"
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't like "don't know anything". Hardly anyone coming here would not know anything about accessibility. Do you have other suggestions?
>>>>
>>>> Good point. Maybe "don't know much"?
>>>
>>> It would then read "Even if you don't know much about web accessibility and you're non-technical, there are several checks you can do to get a rough idea of the accessibility." -- I can live with that but find it a little long and clunky. What is wrong with "Even if you are new to"?
>> I'm guessing (only guessing) that there are many people who would consider themselves not "new to accessibility" yet think they don't have the knowledge to evaluate accessibility at all -- and thus are the target audiences for this sentence. For example, I'm thinking of a high-level manager I know. He's known about accessibility for 10+ years, but not done much directly himself (because he's been at management level that long). If you asked him: "Are you new to accessibility", he'd say, "No, I've known about it for years." If you asked him, "Can you check a web page and tell if there are any accessibility problems with it, he'd say, "No, I don't know enough about it." So he's they type of person we want to tell: "Actually, yes you can!" :-)
> 
> Would that manager consider themself as "don't know much/anything"?

"Don't know anything" - No, he knows something.

"Don't know much" - Yes.

> 
> 
>> But really, this is minor, and I'm OK with "new to" if you want and others didn't comment on it. :-)
> 
> I don't feel strongly at all, just weighing out cost versus benefit.
> 
> 
>> Also note that elsewhere I suggest "not technical" instead of "non-technical". I feel a bit more strongly about that. :-)
> 
> Changed.
> 
> 
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>> 6: "…  get a rough [idea] of how well you are doing."
>>>>>> -> "…  get a rough [idea] of the accessibility of a web page."
>>>>>> R: We imagine that people use Easy Checks to check *other* pages besides
>>>>>> their own.
>>>>>> Note: You say the in the Easy Checks video. If you want to leave this one
>>>>>> as is for flow, I'm totally fine with that.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about "get a rough idea of the accessibility" only?
>>>>
>>>> yup, OK.
>>>> (that might not be sufficient stand alone -- would need another word after accessibility (e.g.,  the accessibility barriers or the accessibility status or such) -- yet I think fine in context)
>>>
>>> It would actually need to be "some of the accessibility aspects" or such, which I mildly think is unnecessarily long. What do you think?
>>
>> /me goes back and re-reads <https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Video-Based_Resources/Evaluation_Introduction> ...
>> * "Even if you are new to web accessibility and non-technical, there are several checks you can do to get a rough idea of the accessibility."
>> * "Sometimes doing only a few checks can still give you a general idea of the accessibility."
>>
>> It's just feels off to me.
>> /me asks her local grammar guru to read the sentences... he thinks it's fine.
>>
>> I guess OK to leave it -- yet please be on the lookout for if anyone else notes it.
> 
> Same as above -- I don't feel strongly but prefer the simplicity.

My grammar guru came back into my office a bit ago, and said, "ya know, it does need another something". I said, "Too late, I already sent the e-mail."

But now I have another chance. ;-)

You know I'm big on simplicity! Yet think the awkwardness of it is likely worse overall.

Maybe ask others in EOWG -- especially native speakers? (I don't think most people have reviewed that wording yet?)

> 
> 
>> (/me had a couple things like that with the recent media review. When only one person noted it, I left it -- but when a second person noted it, I rewrote it. :-)
> 
> Yup...
> 
> 
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>>>>> Video 2: Preliminary Evaluation
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>> 2: "Even if you are new to web accessibility and non-technical, you can do
>>>>>> some easy checks to get a rough impression of the accessibility of any web
>>>>>> page."
>>>>>> [See comments on Overview video script]
>>>>>
>>>>> ACK (keeping a tab on this comment for later edits).
>>>>>
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>> 7: "…can still give you a general idea of how well you are doing."
>>>>>> -> "…can still give you a general idea of how well a page addresses
>>>>>> accessibility."
>>>>>> R: May be doing the checks on a vendor, competitor, or other site/
>>>>>
>>>>> Using "of the accessibility", in line with the prior edits.
>>>
>>> (keeping tab on comments on sequences 2 and 7 above)
>>>
>>>
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>> 9: "The first step to accessibility is understanding where you are"
>>>>>> This not feeling tight For one thing, that assumes checking own website,
>>>>>> whereas we're saying "webpage from your own website, from your competitor,
>>>>>> or from vendors you might want to work with." Another point is we usually
>>>>>> say get a basic understanding of accessibility first (ideally anyway) –
>>>>>> e.g.,  https://www.w3.org/WAI/planning/interim-repairs/ says "If you are
>>>>>> new to accessibility, it is often helpful to first get a basic
>>>>>> understanding of accessibility:" True that then it goes into "Identify the
>>>>>> Issues".
>>>>>
>>>>> Changed to: "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away with finding some of the accessibility barriers."
>>>>
>>>> good! ... actually:
>>>> - second "with": "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away finding some of the accessibility barriers."
>>>> could - "of the": "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away finding some accessibility barriers."
>>>>
>>>> hummm..  "finding barriers" is assuming there are barriers, and maybe not good to say that way?
>>>> maybe: "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away checking if there are some accessibility barriers."
>>>> perhaps: "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away checking for some accessibility barriers."
>>>> perhaps: "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away checking some accessibility issues."
>>>
>>> Changed to "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away doing some accessibility checks."
>>>
>>> Wondering if it now needs the second "with" back? Ie. "With Easy Checks, you can get started right away with doing some accessibility checks."?
>> Definitely not have the second "with".
>>
>> Thanks for thoughtful considerations of my input.
> 
> Thank you for your thoughtful comments :-)

Thank you for your thank you for my thank your for... ah, I've lost my place. ;-)

~Shawn
> 
> Best,
>    Shadi
>

Received on Monday, 16 September 2019 15:43:35 UTC