RE: [wbs] response to 'Curricula -- Designer Modules Starfish Review'

Hello Michele,

Thanks for your detailed feedback on the designer modules.

I will be responding to your comments as I get to them. The TF has already discussed some of your comments, which I have put in GitHub for better tracking and visibility. The issues we have already discussed in the TF are the following:

Designer module 6 Interaction and Feedback needs to be two different sections
https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/issues/392

Are focus indicators a cue?
https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/issues/390

Overall module numbering
https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/issues/385

If for whatever reason GitHub is not an option for you, please let me know and I will put the comments in an email or in the format that is easier for you.

Best.
--

Daniel Montalvo

Accessibility Education and Training Specialist
W3C/WAI

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michele Williams via WBS Mailer <sysbot+wbs@w3.org>
> Sent: jueves, 8 de julio de 2021 19:03
> To: mawilliams031@outlook.com; dmontalvo@w3.org; shadi+EOsurvey@w3.org
> Subject: [wbs] response to 'Curricula -- Designer Modules Starfish Review'
> 
> The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'Curricula -- Designer Modules Starfish Review' (Accessibility Education and
> Outreach Working Group (EOWG)) for Michele Williams.
> 
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Introduction
> >
> > ----
> > This is a Starfish Review survey for the WAI Curricula Designer Modules.
> > What you are reviewing is a complete draft. Please provide high-level
> > wordsmithing comments if you have them: weird expressions you would
> > like to see addressed, things that you would word differently, etc. No
> > need to get into copy-edits at this stage.
> > Please review these modules in detail.
> >  * Are all points covered - is anything missing?;
> >  * Is there anything in there that should not be in there?
> >  * Try to catch all significant issues in this review. (if you bring
> > up big issues later, they could be disruptive)
> >
> >
> 
> Just a clarification question - will all the modules have the same numbers?
> It's a bit confusing and jarring that the prerequisite modules are titled the same (e.g., in "Module 2: Navigation" it references prerequisite
> "Module 6: Understanding and Involving Users"). It's making things hard to track.
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Review level
> >
> > ----
> > What level of review did you do?
> >
> >
> 
>  * (x) I thoroughly reviewed the materials.
>  * ( ) I skimmed them.
>  * ( ) I need more time and will review by the date provided below.
>  * ( ) I didn't get to it and will not in the near future. I abstain from providing comment.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Module 1: Flexible Layout and Design
> >
> > ----
> >   Please review Module 1: Flexible Layout and Design
> >  * What do you think about the learning outcomes?
> >    * What do you think about the topic structure?
> >    * What do you think about the teaching ideas and ideas to assess
> > knowledge?
> >    * What do you think about the competencies section?
> >    * Anything missing?
> >    * Anything you would remove?
> > You can comment in the below edit field or open a GitHub Issue for
> > module
> > 1: Flexible Layout and Design
> >
> >
> 
> Are you considering "focus indicators" a cue? Feels out of place to have this here versus the Navigation module.
> 
> I have other comments below about what I think should be in this module.
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Module 2: Navigation
> >
> > ----
> > Please have a look at Module 2: Navigation
> >
> >  * What do you think about the learning outcomes?
> >    * What do you think about the topic structure?
> >    * What do you think about the teaching ideas and ideas to assess
> > knowledge?
> >    * What do you think about the competencies section?
> >    * Anything missing?
> >    * Anything you would remove?
> > You can comment in the below edit field or open a GitHub Issue for
> > module
> > 2: Navigation
> >
> Comments:
> Do people still use site maps? (That is, create them as developers and navigate them in a meaningful way as site visitors?)
> 
> "Criteria 2.4.6 - Headings and Labels" is listed but not covered (seems it's part of Module 3). Perhaps that shouldn't be one of the items
> listed?
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Module 3: Information Design
> >
> > ----
> > Please have a look at Module 3: Information Design
> >
> >  * What do you think about the learning outcomes?
> >    * What do you think about the topic structure?
> >    * What do you think about the teaching ideas and ideas to assess
> > knowledge?
> >    * What do you think about the competencies section?
> >    * Anything missing?
> >    * Anything you would remove?
> > You can comment in the below edit field or open a GitHub Issue for
> > module
> > 3: Information Design
> >
> >
> Comments:
> Overall this module doesn't feel necessary or cohesive. The first subsection about sectioning/chunking information feels like it belongs with
> the "Landmarks and Cues" in "Module 1: Flexible Layout and Design". The second subsection about tables seems to also tie with that
> module (though I'm sure the goal is to make that one smaller not larger). Then the third subsection on forms seems to need to go with the
> latter half of "Module 6:
> Interaction and Feedback" (which I later recommend breaking up).
> 
> Assuming this section stays as is...
> Since this expands about headings, shouldn't it reference Criteria 2.4.6 - Headings and Labels at the top? Also, I think there's a typo but the
> first paragraph refers to "Module 3: Navigation" (should be Module 2); nevertheless, not seeing the tie-in between Module 2 and 3
> regarding headings.
> 
> When you reference "digital publications", are you referencing ePub or HTML-based books? For HTML books, a "chapter marker" would be
> a heading, right? Is there a different distinction for ePub that needs to be noted?
> (I'm not familiar with ePub specs.)
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Module 4: Images and Graphics
> >
> > ----
> > Please have a look at Module 4: Images and Graphics
> >
> >  * What do you think about the learning outcomes?
> >    * What do you think about the topic structure?
> >    * What do you think about the teaching ideas and ideas to assess
> > knowledge?
> >    * What do you think about the competencies section?
> >    * Anything missing?
> >    * Anything you would remove?
> >
> > Designer%20
> > You can comment in the below edit field or open a GitHub Issue for
> > module
> > 4: Images and Graphics
> >
> >
> Comments:
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Module 5: Multimedia and Animations
> >
> > ----
> > Please have a look at Module 5: Multimedia and Animations
> >
> >  * What do you think about the learning outcomes?
> >    * What do you think about the topic structure?
> >    * What do you think about the teaching ideas and ideas to assess
> > knowledge?
> >    * What do you think about the competencies section?
> >    * Anything missing?
> >    * Anything you would remove?
> > You can comment in the below edit field or open a GitHub Issue for
> > module
> > 5: Multimedia and Animations
> >
> >
> Comments:
> The opening paragraph says, "captions (also known as subtitles)"; in the U.S. these are different so is this an international interpretation of
> these words? Would we want people to be clearer about that?
> 
> Under "Topic: Alternatives to Multimedia Content > Teaching Ideas for Topic" it says, "Explain that defining the mechanisms to enable and
> disable sign language is a designers’ responsibility" - is this meaning a separate video? Turning on/off SL interpreters isn't the same as
> toggling captions. A broader question would be how much of this assumes the instructor is an advanced specialist and will fill in gaps?
> 
> I know this is an overview but many of these topics are really heavy - as in, how to do these well and how to implement them in a player
> (particularly captions and audio descriptions). Would we encourage instructors to have more detailed modules for these topics? Perhaps
> more resources at the bottom are warranted, too?
> 
> Under "Topic: Movement and Animations > Teaching Ideas for Topic" the examples say "Show examples of contents that move or blink"
> and "Show examples of flashing content". Actually people shouldn't ever do that since it may trigger an illness in the students (and even the
> instructor). As an alternative, instructors can offer an opportunity to create sample pages that first caution students to proceed with
> extreme care.
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Module 6: Interaction and Feedback
> >
> > ----
> > Please have a look at Module 6: Interaction and Feedback
> >
> >  * What do you think about the learning outcomes?
> >    * What do you think about the topic structure?
> >    * What do you think about the teaching ideas and ideas to assess
> > knowledge?
> >    * What do you think about the competencies section?
> >    * Anything missing?
> >    * Anything you would remove?
> > You can comment in the below edit field or open a GitHub Issue for
> > module
> > 6: Interaction and Feedback
> >
> >
> >
> Comments:
> This feels like it needs to be 2 different sections - one for multiple interactions (keyboard and gestures) and then one about forms (which
> would include layout/grouping, labels, error handling, and timeouts from the various current modules). Forms are pretty complex and
> usually built all at once (similar to multimedia and animations), so I suspect it makes sense to have all the info about forms in one reference-
> able module as people are building them (or they can be skipped if something doesn't have a form).
> 
> Regarding, creating "specific keyboard shortcuts to support efficiency", I find it's really hard to know what shortcuts are already taken.
> Would we be able to be a bit more detailed or realistic on how people can go about doing this? Also, should this section/content also
> mention "2.1.4 Character Key Shortcuts"?
> 
> Just a suggestion that the keyboard shortcut section might be an opportunity to describe sticky keys and have people understand the pro's
> and con's of complex shortcuts.
> 
> "Topic: Labels and Instructions > Learning outcomes for topic" -- I'm not sure what this means: "design user interfaces that allow to position
> labels where users expect them". I would clarify this point more to avoid confusion such as thinking labels need to be moveable.
> 
> "Topic: Errors and Notifications > Learning outcomes for topic" -- It mentions "provide error messages in the page title" - this doesn't sound
> accurate. Is this referring to putting an error message in the <title> tag of a page or in a heading? I think this is more so saying put it above
> the form, no?
> 
> For notifications, may be worth noting that people should prioritize minimal disruption and moving of focus as well as a designer's
> responsibility to note focus management between dialogs or other overlay components when used.
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Designer Modules Overview Page
> >
> > ----
> > Please review the overview page for the Designer Modules
> >
> >  * Do you agree with the overall introduction of the designer modules?
> >      * Do you agree with the described primary roles?
> >      * Anything missing?
> >      * Anything you would remove?
> > You can comment in the below edit field or open a GitHub Issue for the
> > Designers Overview Page
> >
> >
> Comments:
> Wonderful work. One thing I've found is that people don't really know how to track keyboard navigation and focus management,
> particularly with dialogs and other overlays. I wonder if it's worth adding exercises are bullet points to have students understand typical
> focus behaviors (i.e., new page starts at the top, closing a dialog should return focus to the origin element, etc.) and then have them step
> through how navigation would work in their designs to make sure it's efficient. I know people also go overboard with this at times (e.g.,
> numbering each tab order sequence) but it's a concept I think may be worth going a bit deeper. Otherwise, this seems like a great overview
> of topics and way to help someone structure a course. Designers would get a lot of information from this.
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Additional comments
> >
> > ----
> > Use the space below to include any additional observations or comments
> > that are not covered in the above questions.
> > You can comment on the below field or open a Github Issue
> >
> Additional Comments:
> 
> 
> >
> > These answers were last modified on 8 July 2021 at 17:01:20 U.T.C.
> > by Michele Williams
> >
> Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/curricula-designers-starfish/ until 2021-
> 07-25.
> 
>  Regards,
> 
>  The Automatic WBS Mailer

Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2021 08:43:37 UTC