W3C

Results of Questionnaire Tutorials - Cover page, Images, Tables

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email addresses: ee@w3.org, shawn@w3.org

This questionnaire was open from 2014-12-19 to 2015-01-14.

17 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Support for publishing the Images Tutorial
  2. Support for publishing the Tables Tutorial
  3. Support for publishing the Tutorials Cover Page

1. Support for publishing the Images Tutorial

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are 9
I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) 6
I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages only with the changes in the comment section below 2
I do not support publishing these Images Tutorial pages, because of the comments in the comments section below
I abstain (not vote)

Details

Responder Support for publishing the Images TutorialComments:
Sharron Rush I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) Submitted typos and editor's discretion issues via GitHub
Eric Eggert I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are (editor)
Anna Belle Leiserson I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) I noticed one minor typo. On the Tips page, in "As SVG images consists of tags", the "consists" needs to be "consist" since images is plural. In other words, change to "As SVG images consist of tags".
Wayne Dick I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) http://nosetothepage.org/EO/Meeting07-01.html#image
Paul Schantz I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are
Jonathan Metz I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are
Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages only with the changes in the comment section below priority: [important] In the decorative images page, using role="presentation" should be clearly marked as NOT RECOMMENDED since alt="" is more generally implemented and performs the same task.

priority: [important] In that example, there should be a counter-example of how to appropriately use an hr element instead.

priority: [strong] In the example of CCS fonts in the Images of Text page, please include the @font-face rule, but with /* etc. etc.*/ or something as content, since the presence of the actual font definition is a critical part of the example.

priority: [important] In the images of text page, there should be a discussion of using mathjax as a polyfill as there seems little prospect that browsers will natively improve support for MathML in the near future.

priority: [medium] consider separating mathematical content into its own page

priority: [important] in the section on complex images, approaches 3-5 fail to allow for automatic discovery of the description. This is a serious disadvantage for automated management of accessibility, makes it much harder to implement good image search, and assumes that the author adequately communicates the information in a way the user can understand, which is likely to be failure-prone. These examples should carry some warning to that effect, or be marked NOT RECOMMENDED.

priority: [important] The page on image maps should provide an example of how to handle multiple links to the same destination within an image map.

priority: [important] If there is a known problem with mobile browsers (which) and scaled images making image maps break, there should be an example showing the use of redundant text links.

priority: [strong] There are known problems with image map navigation, where the links are encountered in DOM order rather than associated with the image (HTML bug 27787). This should probably be mentioned and an example given of how to cope with it effectively - especially if you are mentioning the mobile browser bug.

Priority: [medium] Please consider putting the warning at the top of the decision tree instead of the bottom.

Priority: [medium] Please explain whether you need to continue, having reached a given step in the decision tree like putting text into alt (or not).

Priority: [important] in the tips and tricks page, the statement about contrast is likely to reduce accessibility - please replace it with one noting that since people with vision disabilities (colour-blindness, low contrast acuity, etc) often use images, it is important to design images that cater for all users.

Priority: [strong] information about responsive images, and about making SVG accessible (Leonie Watson's article might be a good start) would be a significant improvement on what is there at the moment.

Priority: [strong] please consider moving the "images are important" point to the top of the tips and tricks, and likewise in the concepts page (and undo the styling of it there as "fine print")
Andrew Kirkpatrick I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages only with the changes in the comment section below Looking over past WCAG comments:
"We're not sure that the grouping example for images with role="group" is quite ready. Neither JAWS nor NVDA reads this as I'd hope. JAWS makes mistakes and NVDA ignores the grouping as far as I can tell. Is this ready to advocate for people to use? For that matter, what benefit are we expecting from grouping this way? It seems that it is going to be difficult for users to remember what level of the grouping they are in for an example like this one."
- what was decided on this? The comment seems less cautionary than the warnings about using ARIA for labeling in ways that currently work well.

imagemaps:
"The note can be removed because it isn't an issue that affects WCAG conformance - the ability of image maps to work for any user on a mobile device is what this note is talking about and it isn't specifically related to accessibility."
- decided to keep?

General:
"6) We were surprised by the general lack of mention of ARIA attributes (and that the relevant ARIA techniques are not listed). I assumed this is because the tutorial is being conservative, and EO feels that ARIA is not sufficiently accessibility supported. But then the Images of Text page recommends using MathML. Is MathML better accessibility supported than ARIA? Similarly, is CSS3 (also from that page) more accessibility supported than ARIA? Or am I misreading the reasons that ARIA isn't mentioned in the rest of the tutorial (except for role=presentation, which is called out as a less desirable alternative to alt="", and several examples for complex images)"
- also, there isn't a single link to an ARIA image technique.
Frederick Boland I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are
Vicki Menezes Miller I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are
Shawn Henry I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) Location: An alt Decision Tree page
Priority [medium]
The first two that say "Use an empty alt attribute." Should link to the relevant page for that case -- for people who want more info on it, and to be consistent. Also, the first time I skimmed it, I assumed that the one link in that blue box applied to all three cases in that section.

[I didn't review in detail.]
Vivienne Conway I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are
Lydia Harkey I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are
Sylvie Duchateau I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) In many cases, just after a heading level H2, there is an unclear link: ¶. It would be useful to explain what this link is for or to correct it if this is a mistake. See, for example, in http://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/informative/, after h2 example 1.
2. Editor's discretion: ease navigation for screen reader users: main content in each tutorial leads to the bredcrumbs, then we have the page internal navigation and at last the beginning of the tutorial. Would it be possible to add any markup to help the screen reader user to directly reach the beginning of text, that is, for example, in decorative images leading to: "Decorative images don’t add information to the content of a page. For example, the information...".
3. In the same idea, it may be helpful to have markup allowing to jump away from code snippets.
Howard Kramer I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) I had some suggested changes to the math section and complex images entered via github. I also thought it would be helpful to describe how screenreaders would respond/interact with the html5 "<figure>" element and the wai-aria "aria-described-by" - approach 4 and 5 in complex images (I did not enter this last suggestion in GitHub).
Brent Bakken I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are (non-technical review - for understanding, flow and usability) Just a few typos that I will submit in GitHub.
Kevin White I support publishing these Images Tutorial pages as they are

2. Support for publishing the Tables Tutorial

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are 10
I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) 3
I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages only with the changes in the comment section below 1
I do not support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages, because of the comments in the comments section below
I abstain (not vote) 2

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder Support for publishing the Tables TutorialComments:
Sharron Rush I abstain (not vote)
Eric Eggert I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are (editor)
Anna Belle Leiserson I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) I noticed a super minor typo 2nd paragraph of cover page. In " header cells must be marked up with <th>, and ..." I suggest deleting the comma after <th>. Eric, I have stopped doing more than skimming for fear I will come up with more of this ultra-picky stuff and drive your crazy. :) If it would work for me to edit in GitHub, let me know.
Wayne Dick I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are
Paul Schantz I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are
Jonathan Metz I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are
Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) Summary techniques are problematic - they either provide redundant information or don't work, for given users. There should be a more complete treatment of the problems, and the least-worst practice should be clearly marked as such.
Andrew Kirkpatrick I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages only with the changes in the comment section below Concepts page:
The advice under the multi-level tables is to use id and headers but it suggests that you need to do so for the whole table. It is easier to use header/id where necessary and combine with scope/etc. How about changing "for tables that are so complex" to "for relationships that are so complex"?

"Some document formats other than HTML, such as PDF, may provide similar mechanisms to markup table structures."
- If mentioning a specific format that DOES provide similar mechanisms you need to say that. Please clarify or remove the mention to PDF.

The advice for multi-directional tables in examples 1 and 2 is counter to advice in basic tables.

Frederick Boland
Vicki Menezes Miller I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are
Shawn Henry I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are [I didn't review in detail.]
Vivienne Conway I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are
Lydia Harkey I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are
Sylvie Duchateau I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) Same coments as for previous tutorial.
Howard Kramer I abstain (not vote) Didn't get time to review this section.
Brent Bakken I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are (non-technical review - for understanding, flow and usability)
Kevin White I support publishing these Tables Tutorial pages as they are

3. Support for publishing the Tutorials Cover Page

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are 13
I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) 3
I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page only with the changes in the comment section below
I do not support publishing the Tutorials Cover page, because of the comments in the comments section below
I abstain (not vote)

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder Support for publishing the Tutorials Cover PageComments:
Sharron Rush I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Eric Eggert I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are (editor)
Anna Belle Leiserson I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) More minor edits. Apologies -- and please feel free to ignore. IMO this should be a sentence: "They provide resources for a variety of roles, including:". So instead it would be "They provide resources for a variety of roles." That's because each of the roles in the list is a sentence.
Wayne Dick I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Paul Schantz I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Jonathan Metz I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Andrew Kirkpatrick I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Frederick Boland
Vicki Menezes Miller I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Shawn Henry I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) location: overall
priority: [minor, but easy to change :-]
I do not like that the "Related WCAG2.0 resources" have a different color background (white instead of gray). It looks like a mistake. And it draws attention. I would prefer them to have the same background color. If it is agreed upon to have a different background to call attention to them, then I think it would be good to add a slight border so it doesn't look like a mistake.

location: overall
priority: [minor, but easy to change :-]
In the navigation for an individual tutorial, the current page should have the same background color as the main page – so it is visually connected.

[I didn't review in detail.]
Vivienne Conway I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Lydia Harkey I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are
Sylvie Duchateau I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion) Still the problem of strange links under headings. If this problem is solved everywhere, no opposition to publication.
Howard Kramer I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are Nice work.
Brent Bakken I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are (non-technical review - for understanding, flow and usability)
Kevin White I support publishing the Tutorials Cover page as they are

More details on responses

  • Sharron Rush: last responded on 7, January 2015 at 23:26 (UTC)
  • Eric Eggert: last responded on 8, January 2015 at 14:49 (UTC)
  • Anna Belle Leiserson: last responded on 8, January 2015 at 21:58 (UTC)
  • Wayne Dick: last responded on 8, January 2015 at 22:16 (UTC)
  • Paul Schantz: last responded on 9, January 2015 at 05:41 (UTC)
  • Jonathan Metz: last responded on 9, January 2015 at 16:26 (UTC)
  • Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile: last responded on 13, January 2015 at 13:44 (UTC)
  • Andrew Kirkpatrick: last responded on 13, January 2015 at 15:48 (UTC)
  • Frederick Boland: last responded on 13, January 2015 at 15:57 (UTC)
  • Vicki Menezes Miller: last responded on 13, January 2015 at 16:16 (UTC)
  • Shawn Henry: last responded on 13, January 2015 at 21:35 (UTC)
  • Vivienne Conway: last responded on 14, January 2015 at 08:40 (UTC)
  • Lydia Harkey: last responded on 14, January 2015 at 09:14 (UTC)
  • Sylvie Duchateau: last responded on 14, January 2015 at 11:07 (UTC)
  • Howard Kramer: last responded on 14, January 2015 at 18:07 (UTC)
  • Brent Bakken: last responded on 14, January 2015 at 22:52 (UTC)
  • Kevin White: last responded on 15, January 2015 at 23:53 (UTC)

Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire