w3c/wbs-design
or
by mail to sysreq
.
The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email addresses: shawn@w3.org,shadi+EOsurvey@w3.org
This questionnaire was open from 2016-02-12 to 2016-02-17.
8 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
summary | by responder | by choice
Please read the 12 Feb EOWG teleconference meeting minutes or summary. Indicate your approval or concerns with the resolution passed at that meeting.
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with it! | 5 |
I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolution as passed. | 3 |
I have reviewed the minutes but have concerns with the Resolution and I explain them below. | |
I have not read the minutes yet, and have put the date for my review into the comments box. |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Resolution of 12 February 2016 | Comments |
---|---|---|
George Heake |
|
|
Shawn Lawton Henry |
|
|
Susan Hewitt |
|
|
James Green |
|
|
Brent Bakken |
|
|
Andrew Arch |
|
|
Kevin White |
|
|
Sharron Rush |
|
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with it! |
|
I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolution as passed. |
|
I have reviewed the minutes but have concerns with the Resolution and I explain them below. | |
I have not read the minutes yet, and have put the date for my review into the comments box. |
In the weekly EOWG teleconference, the question was raised about the relationship of the video topics to WCAG requirements for accessibility. Some topics, like keyboard accessibility, can be directly mapped to WCAG. For other topics, like plain language and large click areas, the relationship is implied rather than explicit. Please review the discussion in today's minutes and consider the importance of this question in determining whether (or not) to include the less directly referenced topics.
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I strongly feel that topics should not be included if they are not directly referenced in WCAG. Please indicate which topics you feel should be removed and why. | |
Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. | 7 |
I have mixed feeling and have discussed them below. | |
I have no opinion and will pass on this question and go with the decision of the group. |
(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)
Responder | Relating Showcase videos to WCAG | Comments |
---|---|---|
George Heake | Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. | |
Shawn Lawton Henry | A specific thought I had: text customization is clearly covered in UAAG 2.0 and I think it should be included in the "showcase examples with videos". (It might also be covered more in a WCAG extension.) [UAAG coverage includes "...The user can set text scale, color, style, line spacing, and font family globally (1.4.1, Level A)..." at <https://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG20/#gl-text-config> and there are a few more in other sections.] | |
Susan Hewitt | Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. | |
James Green | Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. | |
Brent Bakken | Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. | Accessibility is about more than just the Guidelines. This is not a video showcase specifically about meeting WCAG 2.0 so I think there is affordance to address accessibility and usability. |
Andrew Arch | Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. | |
Kevin White | Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. | |
Sharron Rush | Accessibility is the point, these are important issues that should be included with links to supporting WAI materials. |
Is there anything that is important to address before FPWD publication?
If you put comments in GitHub, please label them "before FPWD".
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I reviewed or skimmed it and do not see any issues that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | 6 |
I reviewed it and put comments in GitHub that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | |
I reviewed it and put Comments below that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | 1 |
I have not yet gotten to it, and will by the date below. | |
I will pass on commenting this time. | 1 |
Responder | Accessibility Requirements for People with Low Vision - Before Draft Publication | |
---|---|---|
George Heake | I reviewed or skimmed it and do not see any issues that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | |
Shawn Lawton Henry | I reviewed or skimmed it and do not see any issues that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | |
Susan Hewitt | I reviewed or skimmed it and do not see any issues that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | |
James Green | I reviewed or skimmed it and do not see any issues that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | |
Brent Bakken | I reviewed or skimmed it and do not see any issues that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | Minor comments in GitHub. Nothing major to be done now. |
Andrew Arch | I reviewed it and put Comments below that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. | Editors' discretion, but should be considered: 3.4.3 'rivers of 'white' issue should be split off and placed under 3.2 consider cross referencing 3.4.6 with 3.6.2 |
Kevin White | I will pass on commenting this time. | |
Sharron Rush | I reviewed or skimmed it and do not see any issues that need to be addressed before it is published as a draft. |
Feel free to share comments for the Low Vision Task Force to address after FPWD. The best place for comments is GitHub issues. Or you can put comments below.
Responder | Accessibility Requirements for People with Low Vision – other comments |
---|---|
George Heake | |
Shawn Lawton Henry | |
Susan Hewitt | |
James Green | |
Brent Bakken | I have added a couple of issues in GitHub. I don't feel they need to be addressed before FPWD. One other question I had; will there be any techniques or recommendations spelled out as to how to address or implement the User Needs outlined in the green boxes? Will there be information about "what" to do? Document looks good so far. |
Andrew Arch | 3.7.2 - some people also prefer to use their own text magnifier device than than browser based magnifications, especially for longer pages/documents (e.g. http://shop.rnib.org.uk/magnification.html?dir=desc&order=price#maincontent) |
Kevin White | |
Sharron Rush |
The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:
Send an email to all the non-responders.
Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders
WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire
w3c/wbs-design
or
by mail to sysreq
.