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 2016-04-18 to 2016-04-21.
7 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
summary | by responder | by choice
Please read the 15 April EOWG teleconference meeting minutes. Indicate your approval or concerns with the resolution(s) passed at that meeting. The summary and the link to the full minutes is on the 2016 Minutes wiki page.
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them! | 6 |
I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolutions passed. | 1 |
I have reviewed the minutes but have concerns with the Resolutions, 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 | Resolutions of 15 April | Comments |
---|---|---|
Andrew Arch |
|
|
Sharron Rush |
|
|
Brent Bakken |
|
|
James Green |
|
|
Howard Kramer |
|
|
Eric Eggert |
|
|
Denis Boudreau |
|
My name was not mentioned in "Regrets", though I had mentioned being unavailable in the availability survey. Not sure that whether it even matters, but felt like asking. :) |
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them! |
|
I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolutions passed. |
|
I have reviewed the minutes but have concerns with the Resolutions, and I explain them below. | |
I have not read the minutes yet, and have put the date for my review into the comments box. |
summary | by responder | by choice
Please review the Requirements Analysis for "Accessibility and Inclusion" document.
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I accept it as is. | 5 |
I accept it with the suggestions detailed below. | |
I am not comfortable with it for the following reasons. | 1 |
I abstain. | 1 |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Accessibility and Inclusion: Requirements Analysis | Comments |
---|---|---|
Andrew Arch |
|
|
Sharron Rush |
|
I am happy to accept the requirements as stated but am still unconvinced of the need and audience of this resource. Given that others do see the need for it, this seems like a good framework. |
Brent Bakken |
|
|
James Green |
|
I don't see our "new direction" in this document - I think it's important that the requirements reflect the goal of creating a different kind of resource without walls of text, high readability, etc. There is a limited set of people (crossing most personas/audiences) that will even want to start reading something that's just text, especially given our current website design. Simple solution: add a goal under each audience that specifies the actions that will lead to this "new direction" Complex solution: use personas instead of audiences and in those personas, clarify the type of content those people will respond positively and negatively to. |
Howard Kramer |
|
|
Eric Eggert |
|
[Likely not getting to it, sorry.] |
Denis Boudreau |
|
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I accept it as is. |
|
I accept it with the suggestions detailed below. | |
I am not comfortable with it for the following reasons. |
|
I abstain. |
|
summary | by responder | by choice
Keeping in mind the requirements document that you reviewed in the previous question, now please review the updated draft Accessibility, Usability, and Inclusion: Combined Aspects of a Web for All ("Accessibility and Inclusion").
Please add any comments in GitHub as new issues or pull requests. If you are not comfortable with GitHub, please add your comments below.
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I like the document as it is. | |
I like the document; however, I suggest the changes in GiHhub or in the Comments section below - for editors' discretion. | 2 |
I won't like the document unless the comments in GitHub or the Comments section below are addressed. | 2 |
I abstain. | 3 |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Accessibility and Inclusion: Updated Draft | Comments |
---|---|---|
Andrew Arch |
|
Scope of inclusion should mention people from diverse cultural backgrounds as well as speaking/reading other languages (and hence possibly low literacy in the sites primary language) Is it worth mentioning that prototyping in HTML enable a broader range of PWD to be involved in the usability testing? |
Sharron Rush |
|
*Much* improved, still needs streamlining to avoid the wall of text effect, a few suggestions in GitHub. |
Brent Bakken |
|
I think that this document has good information in it, but can't we find a way to present this graphically as well. Venn diagram showing differences and overlap. Other images and icons. We have to make these resources more current looking or most people are going to glaze over and ignore. |
James Green |
|
I can tell this took a lot of work and there is valuable information included, but I am sad to say that it needs a lot of work. It does use shorter paragraphs with headings (which is good) but still needs visuals. And more importantly, I think it misses the mark we discussed Friday. I could see academics linking to this, but not your average interested party. It needs simple, succinct language to motivate users to stick with it. Currently, this resource has a Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease score of 15.2 (well into college graduate level language) and an average grade level (among 5 different formulas) of 16.5. I ran those tests against a few other WAI pages and never got anything below grade 14. To me, this resource is definitely consistent with what we have, but I don't think it represents where we want to be when it comes to developing new resources going forward.... |
Howard Kramer |
|
|
Eric Eggert |
|
[Likely not getting to it, sorry.] |
Denis Boudreau |
|
I did not have time to provide comments, so abstaining for now. I can't say that I like the document, and will have comments/proposals to contribute in the near future. |
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I like the document as it is. | |
I like the document; however, I suggest the changes in GiHhub or in the Comments section below - for editors' discretion. |
|
I won't like the document unless the comments in GitHub or the Comments section below are addressed. |
|
I abstain. |
|
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
.