W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire EOWG Weekly Survey - 18 December 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 2015-12-18 to 2016-01-06.

11 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Resolutions of 18 December
  2. EOWG participant contributions in 2016
  3. Re-join EOWG for 2016
  4. Face to Face survey
  5. Quickref: Comments overview
  6. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Implement content
  7. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Sustain content
  8. Big Picture: Planning and Managing Web Accessibility
  9. Getting Started Tips: Designing alternative text tip
  10. What to call the Report Tool?

1. Resolutions of 18 December

summary | by responder | by choice

Please read the 18 December 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 2015 Minutes wiki page.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them! 8
I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolutions passed. 3
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.

View by responder

Details

Responder Resolutions of 18 DecemberComments
Sylvie Duchateau
  • I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolutions passed.
Eric Eggert
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
Anna Belle Leiserson
  • I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolutions passed.
Andrew Arch
  • I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolutions passed.
Sharron Rush
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
David Berman
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
Susan Hewitt
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
James Green
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
Howard Kramer
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
Kevin White
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
Shawn Lawton Henry
  • I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I was in the teleconference and I'm OK with them!
  • Eric Eggert
  • Sharron Rush
  • David Berman
  • Susan Hewitt
  • James Green
  • Howard Kramer
  • Kevin White
  • Shawn Lawton Henry
I have reviewed the minutes and agree to the Resolutions passed.
  • Sylvie Duchateau
  • Anna Belle Leiserson
  • Andrew Arch
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.

2. EOWG participant contributions in 2016

summary | by responder | by choice

I have read the plans for EOWG participant contribution.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I understand and agree. 10
I understand but don't think I can contribute in that way.
I have reviewed the minutes but have the questions or concerns below. 1
I did not get to this and will do so by the following date.

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder EOWG participant contributions in 2016Comments
Sylvie Duchateau
  • I understand and agree.
Eric Eggert
  • I understand and agree.
Anna Belle Leiserson
  • I understand and agree.
Andrew Arch
  • I understand and agree.
 Hear Hear :)
Sharron Rush
  • I understand and agree.
David Berman
  • I understand and agree.
Susan Hewitt
  • I understand and agree.
James Green
  • I understand and agree.
Howard Kramer
  • I have reviewed the minutes but have the questions or concerns below.
 I don't see myself as having the ability to be a resources creator. I certainly plan to offer edits and suggestions. If the requirement is to be a creator, that is not something I can commit to.
Kevin White
  • I understand and agree.
Shawn Lawton Henry
  • I understand and agree.

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I understand and agree.
  • Sylvie Duchateau
  • Eric Eggert
  • Anna Belle Leiserson
  • Andrew Arch
  • Sharron Rush
  • David Berman
  • Susan Hewitt
  • James Green
  • Kevin White
  • Shawn Lawton Henry
I understand but don't think I can contribute in that way.
I have reviewed the minutes but have the questions or concerns below.
  • Howard Kramer
I did not get to this and will do so by the following date.

3. Re-join EOWG for 2016

I have completed the form to join EOWG in 2016

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
yes 11
no

Details

Responder Re-join EOWG for 2016
Sylvie Duchateau yes
Eric Eggert yes
Anna Belle Leiserson yes
Andrew Arch yes
Sharron Rush yes
David Berman yes
Susan Hewitt yes
James Green yes
Howard Kramer yes
Kevin White yes
Shawn Lawton Henry yes

4. Face to Face survey

I have completed the Face to Face meeting availability survey for 2016.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
yes 11
no

Details

Responder Face to Face survey
Sylvie Duchateau yes
Eric Eggert yes
Anna Belle Leiserson yes
Andrew Arch yes
Sharron Rush yes
David Berman yes
Susan Hewitt yes
James Green yes
Howard Kramer yes
Kevin White yes
Shawn Lawton Henry yes

5. Quickref: Comments overview

summary | by responder | by choice

How to Meet WCAG 2.0 (Quickref) Prototype

The following list of issues is a subset of some of the feedback received during Public Review. It contains links to Github issues where the solution is either straight-forward (for example bugs) or might be Editor’s discretion.

Please review each issue and see if you want to chime in. If you do want to chime in, please comment on the specific issue or leave a comment below.

  1. Issue #75: Add short example to success criteria
    Proposal: While having such sentences would be nice, the quickref might not be the right place for it. It is also currently out of scope. Keep this in mind for a future deliverable.

  2. Issue #77: The visual design needs polish
    I have reviewed this together with Anna Belle and we have changed several things (fonts, borders, margins) to make the design more consistent. Proposal: This was sufficiently addressed.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions. 9
I read through the issues above and added comments to the individual issues on Github (or in the comment field below). 1
I didn’t get to read through them just yet, I will try to get to it soon. (Indicate date in the comment field below.)
I abstain. 1

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Quickref: Comments overviewComments
Sylvie Duchateau
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
Eric Eggert
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
 [Editor/Developer]
Anna Belle Leiserson
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
 Thanks to Eric for tweaking the design!
Andrew Arch
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
Sharron Rush
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
David Berman
  • I read through the issues above and added comments to the individual issues on Github (or in the comment field below).
Susan Hewitt
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
James Green
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
Howard Kramer
  • I abstain.
Kevin White
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
Shawn Lawton Henry
  • I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I read through the issues above and have no comments. I agree with the proposed resolutions.
  • Sylvie Duchateau
  • Eric Eggert
  • Anna Belle Leiserson
  • Andrew Arch
  • Sharron Rush
  • Susan Hewitt
  • James Green
  • Kevin White
  • Shawn Lawton Henry
I read through the issues above and added comments to the individual issues on Github (or in the comment field below).
  • David Berman
I didn’t get to read through them just yet, I will try to get to it soon. (Indicate date in the comment field below.)
I abstain.
  • Howard Kramer

6. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Implement content

The content for the Implement section of the planning resource is ready for a first review.

This is a high-level review. Please concentrate on broad issues, such as overall tone and approach, order of information, and how comprehensive the activities are.

Please review the content for all activities and add any comments in GitHub as new issues or pull requests (use the "Fork & edit on GitHub button" on individual pages). If you are not comfortable with GitHub, please add your comments below.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 7
I skimmed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 2
I will review it by the date in the comment section below.

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

Details

Responder Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Implement content
Sylvie Duchateau
Eric Eggert I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). I like the content, very well done. I guess the For more information and related sections are not completed yet.
Anna Belle Leiserson I skimmed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). Looks like a good start to me
Andrew Arch I skimmed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). Multiple RHS menus on sub-pages are difficult to comprehend
see also minor GitHub suggestions
Sharron Rush I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
David Berman I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). I very much like the section overall, except for the introductory paragraph, which has a number of writing style issues that deserve improvement, in the spirit of Level AAA. You speak of concentrating on broad issues for now... however if that paragraph is a potential full draft then I can provide recommended detailed edits for it.

Structually, I'm not convinced that we need another layer of pages after this level: I'm thinking that including the wording of the five subsections with the Sustain page would be easier for everyone... there is not enough content on those subsection pages to warrant each having its own page.
Susan Hewitt I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
James Green I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
Howard Kramer I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
Kevin White I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). [Document author]
Shawn Lawton Henry

7. Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Sustain content

The content for the Sustain section of the planning resource is ready for a first review.

This is a high-level review. Please concentrate on broad issues, such as overall tone and approach, order of information, how comprehensive the activities are, and whether there is overlap with activities in other sections.

Please review the content for all activities and add any comments in GitHub as new issues or pull requests (use the "Fork & edit on GitHub button" on individual pages). If you are not comfortable with GitHub, please add your comments below.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 7
I skimmed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 2
I will review it by the date in the comment section below.

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

Details

Responder Planning and Managing Web Accessibility: Sustain content
Sylvie Duchateau
Eric Eggert I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
Anna Belle Leiserson I skimmed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
Andrew Arch I skimmed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). Mutliple RHS menus on sub-pages still awkward
Text of sub-page link and text of sub-page description not aligned (disconcerting)
Sharron Rush I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
David Berman I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). I have similar comments on the introductory section as I did for the Implement section. In addition, within the subsections (e.g. Monitor websites) there are instances of passive voice to be vanquished.
Susan Hewitt I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
James Green I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
Howard Kramer I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). I reviewed it but didn't have any specific comments.
Kevin White I reviewed it and have added comments (in GitHub or below). [Document author]
Shawn Lawton Henry

8. Big Picture: Planning and Managing Web Accessibility

Now that all sections have been created, please consider the Planning and Managing Web Accessibility resource as a whole. Consider the content itself - are all fundamentals addressed, is there enough redundancy among roles, is there too much redundancy, etc. Also consider the tone, the clarity, and the success in meeting the goals of this resource.

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

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed and think content, tone approach are fine. 6
I reviewed and have added comments (in GitHub or below). 3
I will review the Big Picture review by the date in the comment section below.
I didn't get to this; I will pass on commenting on it and accept the decisions of the Group on this resource going forward. 1

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

Details

Responder Big Picture: Planning and Managing Web AccessibilityComments
Sylvie Duchateau I didn't get to this; I will pass on commenting on it and accept the decisions of the Group on this resource going forward.
Eric Eggert I reviewed and think content, tone approach are fine. I really, really like it. Good work, Kevin!
Anna Belle Leiserson I reviewed and think content, tone approach are fine.
Andrew Arch I reviewed and think content, tone approach are fine.
Sharron Rush I reviewed and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
David Berman I reviewed and have added comments (in GitHub or below). My above comments on the Sustain section should be considered for the entire resource, when we've reach the point of being that specific.
Susan Hewitt I reviewed and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
James Green I reviewed and think content, tone approach are fine.
Howard Kramer I reviewed and think content, tone approach are fine.
Kevin White I reviewed and think content, tone approach are fine. [Document author]
Shawn Lawton Henry

9. Getting Started Tips: Designing alternative text tip

Further discussion in EO Meeting of 18th Dec highlighted problems with the text that was still suggestive of the designer creating the alternatives. An alternative has been suggested for consideration and comment based on discussion in the meeting.

Please review and comment on updated wording for tip. Add any comments or suggested changes in the GitHub Issue.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed and accept the proposed change. 10
I reviewed the proposed change and have added comments (in GitHub or below).
I reviewed and do not accept the proposed change. Please indicate your reasons in GitHub or below. 1
I will review the proposal by the date in the comment section below.
I didn't get to this; I will pass on commenting on it and accept the decisions of the Group.

Details

Responder Getting Started Tips: Designing alternative text tipComments
Sylvie Duchateau I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
Eric Eggert I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
Anna Belle Leiserson I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
Andrew Arch I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
Sharron Rush I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
David Berman I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
Susan Hewitt I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
James Green I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
Howard Kramer I reviewed and accept the proposed change.
Kevin White I reviewed and accept the proposed change. [Document author]
Shawn Lawton Henry I reviewed and do not accept the proposed change. Please indicate your reasons in GitHub or below. I added 2 comments in GitHub with a few mild-strong points:
https://github.com/w3c/wai-quick-start/issues/297#issuecomment-169660739
https://github.com/w3c/wai-quick-start/issues/297#issuecomment-169662556

10. What to call the Report Tool?

WCAG-EM Report Tool current prototype

Further discussion in EO Meeting of 18th Dec around the name of the evaluation resource concluded in the decision to adjust one word in the name in an attempt to reflect the purpose of the resource and also keep the name stable for those already using the resource.

The current name and sub-name of the resource is WCAG-EM Report Tool / Website Accessibility Evaluation Report Generator. The recommendation was to replace the word "Tool" with another more fitting word. Which of these words best replaces the word "Tool" and fits the purpose of the resource? Please rate from 5 (like best) to 1 (like least) and also use the comment field to nominate an entirely different word if you wish.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
12345No opinion
Builder 2 3 4 2
Maker 4 4 2 1
Generator 1 3 4 2 1
Application 7 3 1
Wizard 3 1 4 1 2
Template 4 2 1 1 2 1

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
Builder3.55
Maker 2.00
Generator 2.91
Application1.45
Wizard 2.82
Template2.50

Details

Responder BuilderMaker Generator ApplicationWizard TemplateComments
Sylvie Duchateau 2 2 3 2 4 3
Eric Eggert 4 1 2 3 5 1 Not feeling strongly. Maker sounds clumsy, template confusing, generator to technical, application to general. Builder or wizard are very ok for me.
Anna Belle Leiserson 2 3 4 1 5 1
Andrew Arch 5 3 4 1 1 2
Sharron Rush 3 4 2 1 3 5 Actually the existing title is fine with me.
David Berman 4 2 2 1 3 1
Susan Hewitt 4 1 3 2 2 5
James Green 3 2 3 1 1 2 I'm fine with keeping it tool.
Howard Kramer 3 2 5 1 3 No opinion
Kevin White 4 1 1 1 3 4
Shawn Lawton Henry 5 1 3 2 1 1

More details on responses

  • Sylvie Duchateau: last responded on 5, January 2016 at 10:02 (UTC)
  • Eric Eggert: last responded on 5, January 2016 at 14:54 (UTC)
  • Anna Belle Leiserson: last responded on 5, January 2016 at 23:55 (UTC)
  • Andrew Arch: last responded on 6, January 2016 at 01:55 (UTC)
  • Sharron Rush: last responded on 6, January 2016 at 20:49 (UTC)
  • David Berman: last responded on 7, January 2016 at 02:08 (UTC)
  • Susan Hewitt: last responded on 7, January 2016 at 02:28 (UTC)
  • James Green: last responded on 7, January 2016 at 02:33 (UTC)
  • Howard Kramer: last responded on 7, January 2016 at 05:09 (UTC)
  • Kevin White: last responded on 7, January 2016 at 09:56 (UTC)
  • Shawn Lawton Henry: last responded on 7, January 2016 at 13:30 (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. Vicki Menezes Miller
  8. Reinaldo Ferraz
  9. Bill Kasdorf
  10. Cristina Mussinelli
  11. Kevin Rydberg
  12. Ahmath Bamba MBACKE
  13. Adina Halter
  14. Denis Boudreau
  15. Laura Keen
  16. Sarah Pulis
  17. Bill Tyler
  18. Gregorio Pellegrino
  19. Ruoxi Ran
  20. Jennifer Chadwick
  21. Sean Kelly
  22. Muhammad Saleem
  23. Sarah Lewthwaite
  24. Daniel Montalvo
  25. Mark Palmer
  26. Jade Matos Carew
  27. Sonsoles López Pernas
  28. Greta Krafsig
  29. Jason McKee
  30. Jayne Schurick
  31. Billie Johnston
  32. Michele Williams
  33. Shikha Nikhil Dwivedi
  34. Brian Elton
  35. Julianna Rowsell
  36. Tabitha Mahoney
  37. Fred Edora
  38. Rabab Gomaa
  39. Marcelo Paiva
  40. Eloisa Guerrero
  41. Leonard Beasley
  42. Frankie Wolf
  43. Supriya Makude
  44. Aleksandar Cindrikj
  45. 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.