RE: [wbs] response to 'Curricula -- Checking overall structure for Designer Modules'

Hello Carlos,

Thanks for your below comments.

I am planning to implement your suggestions regarding module names and language. Just a clarification with regards to your suggestions for module names.

I think "Visual Design", "Information Design", and "Forms Design" work well. "Navigation Design" and "Interaction Design" could go with or without the "Design", but I am happy to add those for now. " on the contrary, I think Images and Graphics Design" and "Multimedia and Animations Design" do not work really well. Images, graphics, multimedia and animations are themselves recognizable concepts. Adding "Design" makes these titles lengthy and difficult to read.

Would you be OK with "Images and Graphics" and "Multimedia and Animations" without "design"?

Best.

--

Daniel Montalvo

Accessibility Education and Training Specialist
W3C/WAI

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carlos Duarte via WBS Mailer <sysbot+wbs@w3.org>
> Sent: miércoles, 1 de septiembre de 2021 11:42
> To: caduarte@campus.ul.pt; dmontalvo@w3.org; shadi+EOsurvey@w3.org
> Subject: [wbs] response to 'Curricula -- Checking overall structure for Designer Modules'
> 
> The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'Curricula -- Checking overall structure for Designer Modules' (Accessibility
> Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG)) for Carlos Duarte.
> 
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Introduction
> >
> > ----
> > This survey is to check in with EOWG on the proposed changes in
> > structure and language for the curricula Designer Modules.
> > It is important to catch all EOWG's input on overall structure at this
> > stage, especially if you do not feel comfortable with the changes
> > proposed or you think further changes are needed.
> > Once agreed on structure, next steps are to polish the resource and
> > bring it back for thorough review.
> >
> > Please see the following background links:
> >  * EOWG 30 July Call
> >    * Designer Modules Starfish Review Survey Results
> >    * [Issue] Designer Modules not Speaking to Designers
> >    * [Issue] Designer Modules Use of Language
> >    * Designer Modules Editor's Draft
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > 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.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Overall Structure
> >
> > ----
> > Some major structural changes have been made to the designer modules.
> > Main changes include
> >  * Module 1: "Flexible Layout and Design" -> "Color and Layout". Topic
> > order is now: "Color", "Styles", "Landmarks and Cues", "Adaptability"
> >    * Module 2 "Information Design" was previously Module 3. Topic
> > order is now: "Text", "Labels and Instructions", "Tables".
> >    * Module 3 "Navigation" was previously module 2
> >    * Module 4: Images and Graphics topic order is now: "Functional
> > Images","Informative Images", "Complex Images","Decorative Images"
> >    * Module 5: Multimedia and Animation -- Use terminology from Making
> > Audio and Video Media Accessible Clarifying carousel coverage. Topic
> > order is now: "Alternatives to Multimedia Content", "Carousels and
> > Movement"
> >    * Module 6 "Interactions and Feedback" -> "Forms, Interactions, and
> > Feedback". Topic order is now: "Forms Design", "Keyboard
> > Interactions", "Gestures and Motion".
> > For a detailed review of the changes, please take a look at:
> >  * Designer Modules Overall Structure Diff
> >    * Discussions on overall structure
> >  * Would you be comfortable with this new structure?
> >    * What further changes would you make to this structure before
> > getting to polish the module contents?
> >
> >
> Comments:
> I agree with the overall direction of the changes and I find this version to be an improvement over the previous version. That being said, I
> believe there is still room for improving the overall structure. The following are my suggestions:
> 
> - Module 1: Topic Adaptability. Adaptability has too large a scope, and the meaning we want to convey might not be easily grasped by
> designers. Given that we use Layout in the name of the module, I suggest replacing "Adaptability" with "Flexible Layout" or "Responsive
> Layout" which, I believe, should resonate better with designers.
> 
> - Module 6. I understand the reasons to highlight forms, but I don't think the proposed solution is the most appropriate. Module 6 was
> previously about interaction design. Now it seems to be a mix of Forms design and Interaction design. And, I guess, forms design will cover
> topics unrelated to interaction design. There has been a proposal to move forms to a different module, which I would support. In this way,
> module 6 could be focused on Interaction design. I would recover a topic about notifications for this module, which, I assume, was being
> moved into the Forms design topic. The new module on "Forms Design", could then cover form specific aspects of topics already introduced
> in other modules (cues, labels, instructions, notifications) and introduce any new topics not covered yet.
> If we find that the topics covered in forms end up being applicable to other components we may want to rename the module to "Forms and
> Widgets Design".
> 
> - Overall structure. I've often found UX design being organized around a set of design topics that include: visual design, information design
> and interaction design. We may want to consider renaming some of our modules to align with this. My proposal would be: Module 1 -
> Visual Design; Module 2 - Information Design (that is already its current name); Module 3 - Navigation Design; Module 4 - Interaction Design
> (this is the current module 6); Module 5 - Images and Graphical Design (this is the current module 4); Module 6 - Multimedia and Animations
> Design (this is the current module 5); Module 7 - Forms Design (this is the new module mentioned in the previous point).
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Language and Tone
> >
> > ----
> > Work is being carried out to simplify the resource language and to
> > make the resource tone closer to designers.
> > Main changes include:
> >  * Change learning outcomes starting phrase "design user interfaces"
> > to "design layouts", "use", and "design user experiences" to make
> > learning outcomes more concise and less jargony
> >    * Overall pass to replace  specific terms used in WCAG with simpler
> > and easier to process terms. For example:
> >    * "contrast ratios" -> "color contrast"
> >      * "sets of web pages" -> "websites"
> >      * "general flash and red flash thresholds" -> "acceptable
> > thresholds"
> >      * remove "motion animation triggered by interaction" and spread
> > through  the remaining learning outcomes for topic
> >    * move away from WCAG definitions from multimedia content and use
> > terminology from Making Audio and Video Media Accessible For a
> > detailed view of the changes, please take a look at
> >  * Overall Diff with Changes [WIP]
> >    * Designer Modules Use of Language
> >  * Do you think these changes solve the issue?
> >    * What other suggestions do you think we should implement at this
> > stage  that would make the language closer to designers?
> >
> >
> Comments:
> I agree with the proposed changes and support the motivation behind them.
> 
> In what concerns additional suggestions, I found we use "mechanism" with some regularity. I was wondering if this term is common in
> designers contents. I searched for it in "The UX Book 2nd edition" (by Hartson and Pyla, 2019), which I use in the UX course I teach. I found
> only 21 instances of mechanism in the whole book (the print version has near 900 pages). And at least half of the instances are related to
> physical mechanisms. So, perhaps "mechanism" is another term we may want to replace at least some of its instances. Some of the
> instances could be replaced by "solution" or "design" (the noun, not the verb).
> 
> >
> > These answers were last modified on 1 September 2021 at 09:41:20 U.T.C.
> > by Carlos Duarte
> >
> Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/curricula-overall-designer-structure/
> until 2021-09-05.
> 
>  Regards,
> 
>  The Automatic WBS Mailer

Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2021 07:32:40 UTC