Re: [wbs] response to 'WCAG Video Scripts - Thorough Review 2'

Hi Kris Anne,

Many thanks for your thorough review and thoughtful comments! Please 
find some responses inline:


On 28/05/2021 17:42, Kris Anne Kinney via WBS Mailer wrote:
>> ---------------------------------
>> (Updated) Draft script for Success Criterion 1.3.5 "Identify Input
>> Purpose"
>>
>> ----
>> (Updated) Draft script for Success Criterion 1.3.5 "Identify Input
>> Purpose" (Nearby: previous version and changes made)
>> For each of your comments, please clearly indicate:
>>   * Location: eg. "SC 1.2.2 - Scene 2"
>>     * Priority: eg. "[e]" for editorial  or "[i]" for important
>>     * Current wording:
>>     * Suggested revision:
>>     * Rationale:
>>
>>
> 
>   * [ ] I am comfortable with this script as it currently is (no changes
> suggested)
>   * [x] Please consider my comments raised in GitHub or in the comments
> field below (for editors' discretion)
>   * [ ] I abstain from commenting and accept the decisions of the Working
> Group
> Comments:
> The last line of the script "Jonathan can also use the saved entries for
> other websites that use correct coding of input fields." makes it sound
> like he can use that same username and password on other websites since
> that is what this video is talking about.   Should the video example be
> something like address fields when ordering so that it's more universal
> across different websites?

The sub-group made edits to address this particular concern.

The sub-group opened issue #69 on this script and welcomes your input:
  - https://github.com/w3c/wai-wcag-videos/issues/69


>> ---------------------------------
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.1.1 "Keyboard"
>>
>> ----
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.1.1 "Keyboard"
>> For each of your comments, please clearly indicate:
>>   * Location: eg. "SC 1.2.2 - Scene 2"
>>     * Priority: eg. "[e]" for editorial  or "[i]" for important
>>     * Current wording:
>>     * Suggested revision:
>>     * Rationale:
>>
>>
> 
>   * [ ] I am comfortable with this script as it currently is (no changes
> suggested)
>   * [x] Please consider my comments raised in GitHub or in the comments
> field below (for editors' discretion)
>   * [ ] I abstain from commenting and accept the decisions of the Working
> Group
> Comments:
> Why do we need "also" in the first sentence?

Fixed, thanks.

The sub-group opened issue #64 on this script and welcomes your input:
  - https://github.com/w3c/wai-wcag-videos/issues/64


>> ---------------------------------
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.1.3 "Keyboard (No Exception)"
>>
>> ----
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.1.3 "Keyboard (No Exception)"
>> For each of your comments, please clearly indicate:
>>   * Location: eg. "SC 1.2.2 - Scene 2"
>>     * Priority: eg. "[e]" for editorial  or "[i]" for important
>>     * Current wording:
>>     * Suggested revision:
>>     * Rationale:
>>
>>
> 
>   * [ ] I am comfortable with this script as it currently is (no changes
> suggested)
>   * [x] Please consider my comments raised in GitHub or in the comments
> field below (for editors' discretion)
>   * [ ] I abstain from commenting and accept the decisions of the Working
> Group
> Comments:
> Same user as in 2.1.1, same comment, why do we need also

Fixed, thanks.

The sub-group opened issue #66 on this script and welcomes your input:
  - https://github.com/w3c/wai-wcag-videos/issues/66



> does being a middle school student matter?  It's not said in the 2.1.1 video.

Removed this description in the script. We will review the persona and 
their appearances at a later stage.

The sub-group opened issue #66 on this script and welcomes your input:
  - https://github.com/w3c/wai-wcag-videos/issues/66


>> ---------------------------------
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.1.4 "Character Key Shortcuts"
>>
>> ----
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.1.4 "Character Key Shortcuts"
>> For each of your comments, please clearly indicate:
>>   * Location: eg. "SC 1.2.2 - Scene 2"
>>     * Priority: eg. "[e]" for editorial  or "[i]" for important
>>     * Current wording:
>>     * Suggested revision:
>>     * Rationale:
>>
>>
> 
>   * [ ] I am comfortable with this script as it currently is (no changes
> suggested)
>   * [x] Please consider my comments raised in GitHub or in the comments
> field below (for editors' discretion)
>   * [ ] I abstain from commenting and accept the decisions of the Working
> Group
> Comments:
> I think the first sentence is too long and should be broken up into two
> sentences.  Alex has been a reporter for many years and has developed a
> repetitive strain injury.  This makes it painful to use a mouse and to type
> for extended periods of time.  Is Alex a he or a she?  2nd section says
> her, but I think its a typo and you meant to say he.

This script has been put on hold for now due to conflicting suggestions.


>> ---------------------------------
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.3.1 "Three Flashes or Below
>> Threshold"
>>
>> ----
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.3.1 "Three Flashes or Below
>> Threshold"
>> For each of your comments, please clearly indicate:
>>   * Location: eg. "SC 1.2.2 - Scene 2"
>>     * Priority: eg. "[e]" for editorial  or "[i]" for important
>>     * Current wording:
>>     * Suggested revision:
>>     * Rationale:
>>
>>
> 
>   * [x] I am comfortable with this script as it currently is (no changes
> suggested)
>   * [ ] Please consider my comments raised in GitHub or in the comments
> field below (for editors' discretion)
>   * [ ] I abstain from commenting and accept the decisions of the Working
> Group
> Comments:
> 
> 
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.3.2 "Three Flashes"
>>
>> ----
>> Draft script for Success Criterion 2.3.2 "Three Flashes"
>> For each of your comments, please clearly indicate:
>>   * Location: eg. "SC 1.2.2 - Scene 2"
>>     * Priority: eg. "[e]" for editorial  or "[i]" for important
>>     * Current wording:
>>     * Suggested revision:
>>     * Rationale:
>>
>>
> 
>   * [ ] I am comfortable with this script as it currently is (no changes
> suggested)
>   * [x] Please consider my comments raised in GitHub or in the comments
> field below (for editors' discretion)
>   * [ ] I abstain from commenting and accept the decisions of the Working
> Group
> Comments:
> Just a question - are there streaming services like this?  Wondering if it
> really helps understand the SC of not building flashing content into media.
>   It's on the content authors not to put flashing content in the content,
> not the streaming service?  this one was the hardest for me to directly
> relate to the SC since it's not directed to the people authoring the
> content.

Changes have been made to clarify the intended meaning. Please confirm 
if this addresses your comments, other please add further comments:
  - https://github.com/w3c/wai-wcag-videos/pull/63/files


Regards,
   Shadi

-- 
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 Monday, 21 June 2021 10:07:00 UTC