RE: [wbs] response to 'Curricula: Content Author Modules Monkey Review'

Hey Donal,

Thanks for your valuable feedback, and sorry for the late response.

Updated draft is at
https://content-author-modules--wai-curricula.netlify.app/curricula/content-author-modules/

Please see my comments below.

> > ---------------------------------
> > Content Author Modules Overview Page
> >
> > ----
> > Please focus on Content Author Modules Overview Page.
> >
> >      * Are all points covered - is anything missing?
> >      * Is there anything in there that should not be in there?
> >
> > You can comment below or leave a GitHub Issue about Content Author
> > Modules Overview Page.
> >
> Comments:
> 
> This page is well-written and presents an succinct overview. I noted one typo in the first H1:  I think a space needs to be added between
> words 'modules' and 'in'.

This is part of a broader issue that affects a specific component of the WAI website. My understanding is that this is only a problem in Chrome-based browsers, where the space before the word "in" is being trimmed.

I have communicated the issue now and will follow-up with you when there is any update.


Can I use your GitHub handle @donalfitzpatrick to follow-up with you on this if needed?

> > ---------------------------------
> > Content Author Module 1: Clear Content
> >
> > ----
> > Please focus on Content Author Module 1: Clear Content.
> >
> >  * Are all points covered - is anything missing?
> >  * Is there anything in there that should not be in there?
> >
> > You can comment below or leave a GitHub Issue about Content Author
> > Module
> > 1: Clear Content.
> >
> Comments:
> 
> In the first learning outcome it states:
> "explain how clear, easy to understand, and easy to read content is essential for some people with disabilities".
> I would suggest that the wording of the learning outcomes for topic 1 be considered for inclusion here. My concern is that, as written, the
> benefits to a wide range of people with disabilities - and indeed all users - could be lost through the inclusion of the word 'some', with no
> clarification or qualification.

Fixed in LOs and teaching ideas for topic.

> I note a possible typographic/formatting issue in:
> "` * Accessible authoring tools"

Fixed.

> In Topic: Titles and link text I feel that there is an over-emphasis on the short answer questions to assess the topic. I wonder could
> alternative practical exercises be used instead.

I have merged the two "Short answer questions" into one and added a new practical assessment.

> > ---------------------------------
> > Content Author Module 3: Forms
> >
> > ----
> > Please focus on Content Author Module 3: Forms.
> >
> >      * Are all points covered - is anything missing?
> >      * Is there anything in there that should not be in there?
> >
> > You can comment below or leave a GitHub Issue about Content Author
> > Module
> > 3: Forms.
> >
> Comments:
> 
> 
> Topic: Labels
> The introduction to this topic highlights the collaboration needed between a range of stakeholders to define clear labels. I would suggest
> that a reiteration of the content found in the third learning objective, in respect of programmatic association, be made here. From reading
> this introductory text I feel that the need to associate labels with form controls (or other UI components) should be made more explicit. I
> note that this is a content-development module, however defining the correct label necessitates an understanding of the association with
> the form field, or group of form fields, to which it applies.

Added in intro, second paragraph:

"Accessible labels often require collaboration between content authors, designers, and developers. Content authors provide the label text. Designers specify the label appearance. Developers associate the label with its corresponding control".

> In the second bullet point on teaching ideas for topic, I suggest removal of the word 'about'.

Fixed.

> > ---------------------------------
> > Content Author Module 4: Images
> >
> > ----
> > Please focus on Content Author Module 4: Images.
> >
> >      * Are all points covered - is anything missing?
> >      * Is there anything in there that should not be in there?
> >
> > You can comment below or leave a GitHub Issue about Content Author
> > Module
> > 4: Images.
> >
> Comments:
> 
> In the first H1, I think there is a typo. Should the word 'in' be present?

The word is present, but it is affected by the broader issue you have raised for other modules. Maybe the way your speech synthesizer is pronouncing "images" together with "in" prevents you from noticing it.

> > ---------------------------------
> > Content Author Module 5: Data Tables
> >
> > ----
> > Please focus on Content Author Module 5: Data Tables.
> >
> >  * Are all points covered - is anything missing?
> >  * Is there anything in there that should not be in there?
> >
> > You can comment below or leave a GitHub Issue about Content Author
> > Module
> > 5: Data Tables.
> >
> Comments:
> 
> There is a typo in H1 between tables and 'in'.

WAI website issue as mentioned above.

> In the 'Learning Outcomes for module' it states:
> "collaborate with designers and developers to present multi-column content using CSS styles instead of layout tables".
> This is an excellent addition, however I submit that it is not just CSS styles which are utilised in the multi-column layout proposed. Inclusion
> of appropriate semantics also facilitates presentation of content in this fashion. I suggest consideration be given to explicit reference to
> markup required in conjunction with CSS to achieve this.
> I wonder whether it might be useful to consider inclusion of material in this module which outlines the differences between a data table and
> a layout-table. I note, for example, that no explicit definition of a data table is provided, so for some content authors it may be challenging
> to know when a table contains data, and when it constitutes a table used solely (or partly) for layout purposes.

The TF felt this was getting too much into specifics for developers and designers, so decided to remove this. For background, see
https://github.com/w3c/wai-curricula/issues/575

Instead, we are proposing to include a new learning outcome saying:

"identify situations where tables are used only for layout purposes"

Rationale: Layout tables are a bad practice and should not be used. So content authors would at least be required to identify these situations if they occur. Others in the team would have the responsibility to fix them.

We discussed before whether we should have a more general module title, "Tables", and then define both data tables and layout tables. But decided that "data tables" is sufficiently understood and could work well as the module title. By including this new learning outcome, we would help instructors better establish the difference between data tables and layout tables.

Would you agree with this substitution? Do you think this helps clarify the differences between data tables and layout tables?

> > ---------------------------------
> > Content Author Module 6: Multimedia
> >
> > ----
> > Please focus on Content Author Module 6: Multimedia.
> >
> >  * Are all points covered - is anything missing?
> >  * Is there anything in there that should not be in there?
> >
> > You can comment below or leave a GitHub Issue about Content Author
> > Module
> > 6: Multimedia.
> >
> Comments:
> 
> There is a typo in the first H1 between 'multimedia' and 'in'.

WAI website issue as said above.

> In the 'Learning Outcomes for module', I would have expected to see content relating to automatic playback of multimedia content, and
> the issues caused. I wonder could this be inserted just before, or after, the bullet-point on flashing content? I mention this because it is
> often the case that multimedia content which plays automatically can prove challenging to users of Assistive Technologies such as screen
> readers.

Interesting. Why would you expect to see this in the content author modules? We have this in the designer module 'Multimedia and Animations', learning outcomes for module
https://www.w3.org/WAI/curricula/designer-modules/multimedia-and-animations/#learning-outcomes-for-module

I am not clear what the content author role would be in providing a method to stop the audio or control the volume of the audio. These two seem to me more like a media player functionality.

Nowadays most assistive technologies include methods to duck all audio except for that of the speech synthesizer, which would solve the issue for the most part.

How would you word this learning outcome from a content authors perspective?

> In the competencies for students: Is there any need to mention a requirement to be somewhat familiar with the processes of multimedia
> creation? Note this is a minor point which can safely be ignored if desired.
> Also, this is mentioned in the context of instructors hence the suggestion to also include for students.

Included.

> In the 'Planning Audio and Video' topic, and to match the suggested addition to learning outcomes above, I would suggest adding material
> concerning automatic playback of audio/video, and ensuring that it does not happen.

Interesting. Why would you expect to see this in the content author modules? See above for more details.

>  Regards,
> 
>  The Automatic WBS Mailer
--

Daniel Montalvo

Accessibility Education and Training Specialist
W3C/WAI

Received on Thursday, 28 July 2022 09:17:33 UTC