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: lspereira@fc.ul.pt,caduarte@campus.ul.pt
This questionnaire was open from 2022-04-22 to 2022-05-06.
9 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
The following is a monkey review survey for the
Please review carefully the following pages:
For background on the purpose and scope of this work, please check the List of Courses Requirements analysis.
Remember: This is the first release of the List of Accessibility Courses. New resources, such as editing entries, advanced filtering, and pagination, will be further discussed in the second version of this resource.
What you're reviewing is everything in the final draft.
Please comment in the below boxes or open a GitHub issue
Responder | Comments |
---|---|
Laura Keen | |
Kevin White | |
Kris Anne Kinney | |
Brent Bakken | |
Andrew Arch | Apologies for not commenting sooner on some stuff. |
Jade Matos Carew | Just one comment and one question from me, see below. |
Sharron Rush | |
Mark Palmer | |
Howard Kramer |
summary | by responder | by choice
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I reviewed it thoroughly. | 7 |
I skimmed it. | 2 |
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 comments, and accept the decisions of the Working Group. (Reminder: This is the last review before the approval to publish survey.) |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Review level | Comments |
---|---|---|
Laura Keen |
|
|
Kevin White |
|
|
Kris Anne Kinney |
|
|
Brent Bakken |
|
|
Andrew Arch |
|
This will be great as a discovery tool when populated :) |
Jade Matos Carew |
|
|
Sharron Rush |
|
|
Mark Palmer |
|
|
Howard Kramer |
|
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I reviewed it thoroughly. |
|
I skimmed it. |
|
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 comments, and accept the decisions of the Working Group. (Reminder: This is the last review before the approval to publish survey.) |
Please focus on the List of Accessibility Courses in detail and share your comments.
Do you feel there are:
Responder | Comments |
---|---|
Laura Keen | My main concern that I raised in this week's EOWG meeting was for courses that have a finite end time. I think there should be a way to have these courses removed from the list so users will not waste time sifting through outdated courses. I am a bit concerned about turnaround time for course submission to the list. 1 month feels a long time to wait if a course has a start/end date. |
Kevin White | Some issues in Github |
Kris Anne Kinney | |
Brent Bakken | |
Andrew Arch | Wonder if we need a 'glossary' to explain the types of resource - mostly clear, but was is a 'training'? Does it include workshops? webinars? etc If not a glossary, then maybe a .popup for 'training'? |
Jade Matos Carew | |
Sharron Rush | In the intro should "web accessibility" be revised to say "web and digital accessibility" since it also seems to include course on documents like PDF? As well, one of the courses is described as applying "to all digital technology, including websites, software, electronic devices, and mobile apps." |
Mark Palmer | I think the only thing that jumps out is the order of the courses displayed. I'd expect the introductory courses to be nearer the top of the list before filters are applied and the alphabetical approach works against this a little bit. I understand the reason for doing it alphabetically and appreciate that there are pros and cons to every possible ordering though. |
Howard Kramer | It looks good to me. See 4 for one area I think could be added. |
If you’re able, please use the filters to find a course through the List of Accessibility Courses. Please note in the comment section if this worked, how it worked. Or, if not, what went wrong or what was confusing.
Responder | Comments |
---|---|
Laura Keen | The filtering options worked well for me. |
Kevin White | Work well other than one peculiarity with the select options - issue raised. I like the good positioning of the clear buttons and the presentation of currently applied filters. |
Kris Anne Kinney | Filtering worked for me, the numbers left in each category was helpful. |
Brent Bakken | I thought the filtering looked a lot cleaner in this version. Not so cumbersome to use. No additional recommendations from me at the moment on filtering. |
Andrew Arch | Filters worked just as expected :) |
Jade Matos Carew | For the 'show info' section in 'format' I think the definitions for blended and hybrid should be the other way round. That would need to be changed on the submit a course page as well. For the audience part, what if a course is for a general/mixed audience? Should that be a filter? (In addition to general?) I like the filters and the format of the tips. |
Sharron Rush | The filters surprise me by filtering without any user actions. Once I understood that was happening, it's fine. I am sure it was SR tested and announced to users, yes? |
Mark Palmer | I think the filters work well. |
Howard Kramer | It worked fine. One through that occurred to me was help on the Audience filter. It might be nice to have an explanation of what types of courses are associated with each role. |
Please focus on the submission form in detail and share your comments.
Do you feel they are:
Responder | Comments |
---|---|
Laura Keen | The form is long but well written. There is ample spacing between form fields and the descriptions and labels are written in plain language and easy to understand. |
Kevin White | Some issues in Github |
Kris Anne Kinney | Submission form was thorough. I went through as a keyboard user and I was able to access all of the content. |
Brent Bakken | - Under the Country section it says "Indicate by which country or countries this resource is provided." To me this is a little confusing. If I was working for company XYZ and the company was based in Canada, I would think to myself, the course is provided by "XYZ" not by "Canada." Maybe it should read, "Indicate the country or countries the Provider is located in." - Under the Format section, "Blended" is still confusing to me. I don't think I even understand the difference between Blended and Face-to-face and online. - Under the Availability section, would it be possible to also add a choice of "Continuously Available" or something similar for courses that can be started at any time. |
Andrew Arch | Name- do we want full name, or is a first / last / common name acceptable? Should the country list allow for "anywhere' for trainings that that can be undertaken anytime/anyplace due to being online and having no instructor component? (eg the WAI edX one? Should audience have 'General' for a training that isn't for any specific role? Platform - Intopia delivers training via Zoom in most cases, but can accommodate Teams. Should additional platforms be allowed? Availability - what happens in the case where a training does have a specific start ( or end) date but can be delivered to a group 'on demand' or 'on request'? |
Jade Matos Carew | |
Sharron Rush | The submission form is keyboard accessible and instructions seem clear. Isn't a month a long time for the review considering that some of the courses may be time limited? Can that process be accelerated? |
Mark Palmer | No comments. |
Howard Kramer | I would add an audience option of "all audiences". The scheduling choices could use another category. Something like "weekly schedule" or "weekly deadlines." For example, my online course is asynchronous but students must submit their work for each week by certain deadlines. I didn't feel either category fit this type of schedule. |
If you’re able, please submit a new course through the
Please note in the comment section if this worked, how it worked. Or, if not, what went wrong or what was confusing.
Note: Submissions are subject to further review and approval, so entries will not be available on the listing immediately after submission. This process is managed through GitHub PRs (https://github.com/w3c/wai-course-list/pulls) - new submissions should appear on this page, if you wish to verify the information you have provided.
Responder | Comments |
---|---|
Laura Keen | I submitted the form. When I tried to save the preview as a pdf it repeated the first page of fields 9 times. So the pdf had the same information repeated and cutoff the remaining fields. The process was easy. If the preview issue can be fixed that will be a good feature for submitters to know what they sent while they wait for their course to show up on the list. |
Kevin White | Some issues in Github |
Kris Anne Kinney | Submission worked, i did a complete fake course, so please don't appove that. :) |
Brent Bakken | I did not have any issues submitting the my test course in the submission page. One question... At the end of the submission I was presented with a page showing me my information. At the top there was a button that said something like "close information" (I can't remember exactly what it said), but at the bottom there was another button that said "Send Information." I wanted to click the top button to see what the page would do, but I was not sure if I would loose my information before I sent it in. There needs to be a little more information around what that top button does so submitters do not worry about loosing their data before it is submitted. |
Andrew Arch | Form worked well - but see previous comments/suggestions |
Jade Matos Carew | |
Sharron Rush | Submission seemed to work well, form was clear and keyboard accessible. Agree with Kevin's suggestion in GitHub for providing more info about what the process will be upon submission. |
Mark Palmer | Seems very straightforward. |
Howard Kramer | I submitted one of my courses. It worked fine. Suggested changes are listed in 5 above. |
Use the space below or open a GitHub issue to include any additional observations or concerns you would like to see addressed.
Remember: This is the last review before the approval to publish survey.
Responder | Comments |
---|---|
Laura Keen | Great work on this form submission! |
Kevin White | This is really impressive. Loving the clean design. |
Kris Anne Kinney | Just wanted to thank you for your work on this. I hope its going to be so helpful to people learn more about accessibility. |
Brent Bakken | Great job so far. Looking really good! |
Andrew Arch | |
Jade Matos Carew | I can't wait for this to be released, I've mentioned it to a few people and it'll be a much used resource! |
Sharron Rush | This is not relevant to the structure of the form itself but I am unclear about how/when courses are removed from the list. If they are date limited, is the removal a manual or automatic process? |
Mark Palmer | |
Howard Kramer | Looks great. Should be a very valuable resource. |
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
.