W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire EOWG Weekly Survey - 15 January 2015

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 2016-01-15 to 2016-01-27.

14 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Minutes of 15 January
  2. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Big picture
  3. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Repetition in Sustain
  4. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: More information and Related activities
  5. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Design

1. Minutes of 15 January

summary | by responder | by choice

Please read the 15 January EOWG teleconference meeting minutes. A summary and the link to the full minutes is on the 2016 Minutes wiki page.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I was in the teleconference 10
I have reviewed the minutes and understand them. 3
I have reviewed the minutes but have questions about the content, included below.
I have not read the minutes yet, and have put the date for my review into the comments box.

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

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Minutes of 15 JanuaryComments
Sylvie Duchateau
  • I have reviewed the minutes and understand them.
Susan Hewitt
Anna Belle Leiserson
  • I was in the teleconference
Eric Eggert
  • I was in the teleconference
Vicki Menezes Miller
  • I was in the teleconference
George Heake
  • I have reviewed the minutes and understand them.
David Berman
  • I was in the teleconference
Brent Bakken
  • I was in the teleconference
Sharron Rush
  • I was in the teleconference
Howard Kramer
  • I was in the teleconference
Kevin White
  • I was in the teleconference
Andrew Arch
  • I was in the teleconference
James Green
  • I have reviewed the minutes and understand them.
Shawn Lawton Henry
  • I was in the teleconference

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I was in the teleconference
  • Anna Belle Leiserson
  • Eric Eggert
  • Vicki Menezes Miller
  • David Berman
  • Brent Bakken
  • Sharron Rush
  • Howard Kramer
  • Kevin White
  • Andrew Arch
  • Shawn Lawton Henry
I have reviewed the minutes and understand them.
  • Sylvie Duchateau
  • George Heake
  • James Green
I have reviewed the minutes but have questions about the content, included below.
I have not read the minutes yet, and have put the date for my review into the comments box.

2. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Big picture

summary | by responder | by choice

Now that all sections have been created, please consider the Planning and Managing Web Accessibility resource as a whole.

Please consider all the activities and how they are grouped together. Consider how you engage with planning accessibility activities; is there anything that is not covered in this resource? are there things that you don't do? How would this resource help each of the planning personas?

Add any comments or suggested changes to GitHub or in the comments section below.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities. 8
I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 2
I will review the section by the date in the comment section below. 2

(2 responses didn't contain an answer to this question)

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Big pictureComments
Sylvie Duchateau
Susan Hewitt
  • I will review the section by the date in the comment section below.
 I currently have no issues with the current resource but will continue to revisit and ponder over the next couple of weeks.
Anna Belle Leiserson
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
Eric Eggert
  • I will review the section by the date in the comment section below.
 Jan 21
Vicki Menezes Miller
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
George Heake
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
David Berman
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
Brent Bakken
  • I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 I think that the Implementing section may be missing the most important piece. We need to carry forward the "Assign Responsibilities" activity from the Plan section here. After "Building the Skills" and "Enhancing the Policies", we need to carry out the accessibility work as assigned earlier. Then we move on to the "Evaluate Early and Regularly" activity. To me it just seems like there is no "Do" activity.

Also, I think that in the "Monitor Website" activity of the Sustain section we need to be referring back to the "Establish Monitoring Framework" activity of the Plan section. These monitoring goals and guidelines have already been set up in the planning phase. It is important that the organization circles back to them when doing sustain monitoring of accessibility.
Sharron Rush
  • I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 It seems complete although I have suggested a few changes to the names of the activities. As well, I tend to think the "business case" is a bit overused and undersold. It could be folded into "Raise Awareness" in my opinion but that is not a strong feeling and I know many are quite fond of the idea of the business case.
Howard Kramer
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
Kevin White
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
 [Document author]
Andrew Arch
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
 it's in very good shape - I'm keen to see this resource released
James Green
  • I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
Shawn Lawton Henry

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I reviewed the resource and think the activities are complete and will help in accessibility planning activities.
  • Anna Belle Leiserson
  • Vicki Menezes Miller
  • George Heake
  • David Berman
  • Howard Kramer
  • Kevin White
  • Andrew Arch
  • James Green
I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
  • Brent Bakken
  • Sharron Rush
I will review the section by the date in the comment section below.
  • Susan Hewitt
  • Eric Eggert

3. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Repetition in Sustain

summary | by responder | by choice

The Sustain section inevitably includes some overlap with other sections. Ongoing accessibility work will result in the same activities being revisited.

Please consider the section and think how comfortable you are with how this overlap has been presented. Is there too much or too little repitition? Is the approach taken sensible? Is there more that is needed?

Add any comments or suggested changes to GitHub or in the comments section below.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine. 9
I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 2
I will review the section by the date in the comment section below. 1

(2 responses didn't contain an answer to this question)

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Repetition in SustainComments
Sylvie Duchateau
Susan Hewitt
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
Anna Belle Leiserson
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
Eric Eggert
  • I will review the section by the date in the comment section below.
 Jan 21
Vicki Menezes Miller
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
George Heake
  • I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 I think the overlap is right on target. It is just enough to pull everything together at the "end" of the cycle. And there is not too much repetition that would confuse the reader.
David Berman
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
Brent Bakken
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
 I believe that it is important to have the sustain section even if there is overlap. It will do good to reinforce the concept that accessibility is an ongoing effort and there should be activities to verify that things are continuing to move forward.

These activities are written well to show that they are sustaining activities of earlier planning and work. I think that it will truly reinforce that accessibility work is never truly complete.
Sharron Rush
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
Howard Kramer
  • I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 The only thing I notice is that the "read more" option is very easy to miss. I would put a plus or something more obvious to indicate that individual sections expand.
Kevin White
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
 [Document author]
Andrew Arch
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
 repetition is ok. However, are we missing something about "inviting feedback" when issues arise?
James Green
  • I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
Shawn Lawton Henry

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I reviewed the section and think content, tone, and approach are fine.
  • Susan Hewitt
  • Anna Belle Leiserson
  • Vicki Menezes Miller
  • David Berman
  • Brent Bakken
  • Sharron Rush
  • Kevin White
  • Andrew Arch
  • James Green
I reviewed the section and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
  • George Heake
  • Howard Kramer
I will review the section by the date in the comment section below.
  • Eric Eggert

4. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: More information and Related activities

summary | by responder | by choice

Many of the activities within the Planning and Managing Web Accessibility resource have links to more information within the WAI site or related activities elsewhere in the resource.

Please review these links and consider whether the linked resource or activity is sufficiently relevant to the activity. Other resources should provide supporting information or should be related to the planning activity. Related activites should be important to or required for the activity being discussed.

Add any comments or suggested changes to the GitHub or in the comments section below.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed the links and have no comments to add. 5
I reviewed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 4
I skimmed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 3
I will review the links by the date in the comment section below. 1

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

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: More information and Related activitiesComments
Sylvie Duchateau
Susan Hewitt
  • I reviewed the links and have no comments to add.
Anna Belle Leiserson
  • I reviewed the links and have no comments to add.
Eric Eggert
  • I will review the links by the date in the comment section below.
 Jan 21
Vicki Menezes Miller
  • I reviewed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 Some suggestions for additional links.

Resource: “INITIATE”
I think two resources which bring additional arguments for accessibility concern mobile usage and older users. If the resources are still current, then, the following two links might be useful under "Business Case".

- https://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/overlap.html or
- https://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/Overview
I would add one of the above since it gets people excited because of the variety and size of devices and the overlap in problems

- https://www.w3.org/WAI/older-users/Overview.php
I would add this as a related resources since there are concerns and again overlap with older people's usage

Resource: “PLAN”
Activity: “Determine budget”
http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/fin
The business case resource is excellent but quite long. I’d make a direct link to the financial factors of Business Case resource.

Resource: "PLAN"
Activity: "Review web sites"
https://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/improving#assess
Although the above resource is referenced in full under “Learn the basics”, I think that the part on assessing sites could be referenced here directly.

Resource: "PLAN"
Activity: "Review environment"
Perhaps a link to the selecting tools would be useful:
https://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/selectingtools
and/or
https://www.w3.org/WAI/impl/software

Resource: "PLAN"
Activity: "Establishing monitoring framework"
http://w3c.github.io/wai-dynamic-planning/plan/#set-objectives
Link to “Setting objectives” needs to be corrected

Build Skills and Expertise
There is a link error - it goes to business case. I think it should probably go to the following link:
https://www.w3.org/WAI/training/Overview.html
Under this item, I would add the Tutorials collection link:
https://www.w3.org/WAI/train.html

A resource which could be linked somewhere (but where?) is:
“Involving Users in Web Projects for Better, Easier Accessibility”
https://www.w3.org/WAI/users/involving
It could possibly be added to either
“INITIATE” (at “Learn the basics”) or “PLAN” (at “Review websites”) or “IMPLEMENT” (at “Build Skills and Expertise” or at “Evaluate early and regularly”)

Business Case Powerpoint presentation:
Is it worth linking it up under Business case?
http://www.w3.org/WAI/presentations/bcase/bcase-presentation-format.ppt

Tips for getting started ? https://www.w3.org/WAI/gettingstarted/tips/index.html
I think a link to these tips needs to be added. There are a few places where they could be linked up, e.g. "Build Skills and Expertise" or "Review sites" or "Evaluate Early and Regularly"
George Heake
  • I reviewed the links and have no comments to add.
David Berman
  • I reviewed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 They all seems relevant, however it be nice if Set Objectives and Gather Support included at least one link each. For the latter, perhaps links to some motivational videos that make the argument of the benefits of accessibility (which we curated for other tools).
Brent Bakken
  • I skimmed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 - In the Sustain Section: Monitor Websites is related to the Establish Monitoring Frameworks activity (Planning Section)
- In the Sustain Section: Engage with Stakeholders is related to the Gather Support activity (Initiate section)
Sharron Rush
  • I reviewed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
Howard Kramer
  • I reviewed the links and have no comments to add.
Kevin White
  • I reviewed the links and have no comments to add.
 [Document author]
Andrew Arch
  • I skimmed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 would be good in "initiate" / "explore" to be able to link to an updated Policies page from the bullet
James Green
  • I reviewed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 it might be nice to give the related activities some kind of descriptive text, giving the user context as to where they fit into the process. The more info links have little blurbs that say what they are about. Example: Under Initiate: Learn the Basics, you could add the following blurb to the “Build skills and expertise” link: Improve accessibility awareness and develop core skills for key staff (Implement).
Shawn Lawton Henry
  • I skimmed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
 About the design not the content: I find the explanation on a separate line, and the two columns, and the spacing makes it hard to process (and take up more space than it warrants).

I suggest formatting as:
* link – explanation
* link – explanation
* link – explanation

(with no space before the list or in between list item since most of these more info lists have few items and that's not a focus of the doc)

Also consider making the "For more information" and "Related activities" smaller text so they don't jump out so much.

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I reviewed the links and have no comments to add.
  • Susan Hewitt
  • Anna Belle Leiserson
  • George Heake
  • Howard Kramer
  • Kevin White
I reviewed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
  • Vicki Menezes Miller
  • David Berman
  • Sharron Rush
  • James Green
I skimmed the links and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
  • Brent Bakken
  • Andrew Arch
  • Shawn Lawton Henry
I will review the links by the date in the comment section below.
  • Eric Eggert

5. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Design

The EO meeting of January 15th had an involved discussion regarding presentation of each of the planning sections. The discussion narrowed down the options to two ideas that had a reasonable level of support/interest/acceptance.

Please consider these two options and indicate your preference and reason for this preference. If you prefer one option but would prefer it more with some tweaks, please add the tweaks in the Comment box.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I STRONGLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse 4
I MILDLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse 2
I STRONGLY Prefer Option 2: All on one page 3
I MILDLY Prefer Option 2: All on one page 2
Prefer something else (please indicate what you think would work) 3

Details

Responder Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: DesignRationaleComments
Sylvie Duchateau Prefer something else (please indicate what you think would work) No preference, both work fine.
Susan Hewitt I STRONGLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse The pages can get a bit long so the expand/collapse makes them feel more manageable. I would suggest changing the "Read more..." toggle to "close" or similar when the section is expanded.
Anna Belle Leiserson I STRONGLY Prefer Option 2: All on one page I think this question can only be really answered with usability tests. In the absence of usability tests, I default to Steve Krug's dictums of (a) "don't make me think" and (b) reduce number of clicks. Also (though this is less important) I think it looks better, less cluttered without all extra buttons and lines of text.
Eric Eggert I STRONGLY Prefer Option 2: All on one page I find Option 1 convoluted, especially with the added On this Page menu. And while I feel strongly, I won’t block the Group’s decision.
Vicki Menezes Miller I STRONGLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse I find the page without expand-collapse functionality too long. The reasons for my preference are:

- I can immediately identify information of interest
- Readability is better - there is less clutter
- I have the option to expand all, if i want
- I am not limited by the page only being offered with a single option to read all
I think you will get feedback once it becomes open for comments. Thus, I would leave the page with the two options so that the external community can see both possibilities.
George Heake I STRONGLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse As I was reviewing the links, it made it must easier to navigate through the sections. Also if someone was looking for specific information, it would also speed up and assist their navigation.
David Berman I STRONGLY Prefer Option 2: All on one page As per minutes of what I said in the teleconference call. In summary, I find the expand-collapse to be overkill in this situation, and not worth the tradeoff in loss of simplicity and printability.
Brent Bakken I MILDLY Prefer Option 2: All on one page As I was reviewing for the bigger picture, I quickly realized that I liked to have everything on one page without the clutter of the expand and collapse functionality. In my opinion, there is just not enough content to go through to justify the clutter and added complexity. I can still easily skim the headings and get through the content quickly and look at the detail when needed.

If there is an overwhelming amount of public feedback on the usability of this option, I am fine with changing to Option 1.
Sharron Rush I MILDLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse Seeing them all listed with a short explanation helps to emphasize their interdependence.Ideal would be if each section could have the activities listed so their relationship to each other is clear. For each to then have an option to expand as more info is needed would be good in my view.
Howard Kramer I STRONGLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse As I mentioned at the meeting, I think the expand option allows a quicker general overview of the processes and conveys that this is a process.
Kevin White Prefer something else (please indicate what you think would work) I have no preference. Both approaches have pros and cons that can be well supported.
Andrew Arch I MILDLY Prefer Option 2: All on one page KISS - last weeks discussion convinced me that we are trying to add interactivity that is not justified.
James Green Prefer something else (please indicate what you think would work) Could we have the expand/collapse only on small screens? After seeing the demos and reading Eric’s comments in the minutes about cognitive load, I have been swayed away from expand/collapse on desktop. I think it does help more people (as Shawn said when channeling me) but really only seems necessary when on a mobile device since there isn’t much content. It’s not super important to me so I’ll go with the group but also support usability testing. I read that Anna Belle and Andrew are interested in user testing and I would be happy to offer my usability lab to test these options if that is wanted.
Shawn Lawton Henry I MILDLY Prefer Option 1: Expand/collapse It makes it sooo easy to skim to get an overview of the content of the page. Then it's easy to *either* expand all and read through, *or* just to expand the ones you are interested in at the time.

Thus it meets multiple use cases and user preferences.

I think the ability to get a good overview, and the ability to choose whether to see it all at one or choose specific sections is well worth the extra few buttons.

Additional benefits:
* Nice that many people will have most or all of the content above the fold on most of the pages.
* Print flexibility - the user could expand *some* and then print it.		If folks didn't see the updated version with expand-collapse, please look again -- it's much simpler! Make sure you do a hard refresh.

(As I noted in the last telecon, for the no ex-col option, I think after each section there should be a link up to the page contents, e.g., https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/people-use-web/principles#toc but with nicer design :-)

More details on responses

  • Sylvie Duchateau: last responded on 19, January 2016 at 15:46 (UTC)
  • Susan Hewitt: last responded on 19, January 2016 at 23:31 (UTC)
  • Anna Belle Leiserson: last responded on 19, January 2016 at 23:46 (UTC)
  • Eric Eggert: last responded on 20, January 2016 at 15:20 (UTC)
  • Vicki Menezes Miller: last responded on 20, January 2016 at 15:56 (UTC)
  • George Heake: last responded on 20, January 2016 at 18:51 (UTC)
  • David Berman: last responded on 20, January 2016 at 22:04 (UTC)
  • Brent Bakken: last responded on 20, January 2016 at 23:29 (UTC)
  • Sharron Rush: last responded on 21, January 2016 at 03:19 (UTC)
  • Howard Kramer: last responded on 21, January 2016 at 04:44 (UTC)
  • Kevin White: last responded on 21, January 2016 at 10:24 (UTC)
  • Andrew Arch: last responded on 21, January 2016 at 11:08 (UTC)
  • James Green: last responded on 22, January 2016 at 05:10 (UTC)
  • Shawn Lawton Henry: last responded on 22, January 2016 at 14:09 (UTC)

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Eric Velleman
  2. Shadi Abou-Zahra
  3. Kazuhito Kidachi
  4. Jedi Lin
  5. David Sloan
  6. Mary Jo Mueller
  7. Reinaldo Ferraz
  8. Bill Kasdorf
  9. Cristina Mussinelli
  10. Kevin Rydberg
  11. Ahmath Bamba MBACKE
  12. Adina Halter
  13. Denis Boudreau
  14. Laura Keen
  15. Sarah Pulis
  16. Bill Tyler
  17. Gregorio Pellegrino
  18. Ruoxi Ran
  19. Jennifer Chadwick
  20. Sean Kelly
  21. Muhammad Saleem
  22. Sarah Lewthwaite
  23. Daniel Montalvo
  24. Mark Palmer
  25. Jade Matos Carew
  26. Sonsoles López Pernas
  27. Greta Krafsig
  28. Jason McKee
  29. Jayne Schurick
  30. Billie Johnston
  31. Michele Williams
  32. Shikha Nikhil Dwivedi
  33. Brian Elton
  34. Julianna Rowsell
  35. Tabitha Mahoney
  36. Fred Edora
  37. Rabab Gomaa
  38. Marcelo Paiva
  39. Eloisa Guerrero
  40. Leonard Beasley
  41. Frankie Wolf
  42. Supriya Makude
  43. Aleksandar Cindrikj
  44. Angela Young

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

Report issues on GitHub project w3c/wbs-design or by mail to sysreq.