For quite some time, we've needed a UI design for info moved from TR to the WAI sub-site.

In 2020 we (finally:-) started a project to design the UI for the WCAG Techniques and Understanding WCAG. Here is the Requirements Analysis.

We're also using this as a template for the ACT Rules, "Supplemental Guidance" (from COGA and others), and ARIA APG (moving from /TR/ to WAI website).

We are now seeking input on these prototypes:

• ACT Rule
• @@Understanding, @@Technique
• "supplemental guidance" COGA design pattern

We hope to finalize these templates in early August, so that we can finalize the ACT Rules implementation and announce in early September. Hopefully WCAG Techniques and Understanding WCAG will follow before too long (there are some back-end issues that might take a while to get addressed).

Note:

• Status of prototypes: Most things are defined, although not all are implemented consistently yet (e.g., titles and nav)
• Please focus on the ACT Rule prototype, and look at the other prototypes to see how your input works for the other types of content

You don't need to answer all these questions. Feel free to just answer the ones that you have comments on.

Details

Thoughts on layout, colors, wording, other?

On the navigation, is "All Rules" clear enough? Or do we need "List of All Rules" or "All Rules List"? Con: "List of All Supplemental Guidance" is really long.
(see also question below on the title for that page.)

Details

Thoughts on layout, colors, other?

Details

From an individual Rule page, can you tell what this is?

1. Is it clear enough (though succinct) what the page is?
2. Is it clear where to go to learn more?
3. Any suggestions for revisions?

Important: Note the expected usage:

• Most people using these Rules will use them a lot. Therefore, we want to limit unnecessary clutter and repetitive text.
• Some readers might look at a few Rules now and then to help them better understand an aspect of WCAG.
• Someone could land on a Rule page from a search engine, with no context.

Details

Comments on the About page?
Note that this wording has been approved by the AG WG. Please mark your comments as [HIGH], [MED], or [LOW].

1. Does it make sense?
2. Any [HIGH], [MED], or [LOW] suggestions for revision?

Details

See the All Rules page. And similar All Techniques page and All Understanding documents page.

Note the text above the H1 is planned to be "Act Rules for WCAG 2", "Understanding WCAG 2.@", "Techniques for WCAG 2.@"

This also relates to the text in the navigation. Usually it is best if they at least start with the same word(s) so users are confident that the page they get to is indeed what they selected in the navigation.

Thoughts on H1/title? (We could change the h2s.) e.g.,

1. All Rules | All Techniques | All Understanding Documents
2. All Rules List | All Techniques List | All Understanding Documents List
3. List of all Rules | List of All Techniques | Lost of All Understanding Documents
4. ...

Details

See the All Rules page. And similar All Techniques page and All Understanding documents page. Read the draft Summary text in all 3.

Thoughts on Summary text for the All Rules page?

Details