W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire Content Authors Curricula -- Overall Module Structure

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

This questionnaire was open from 2022-03-02 to 2022-03-09.

18 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Introduction
  2. Review level
  3. Module 1: Content Clarity
  4. Module 2: Content Structure
  5. Module 3: Images
  6. Module 4: Data Tables
  7. Module 5: Multimedia
  8. Module 6: Labels and Instructions

1. Introduction

Content Author modules are part of the overall Curricula on Web Accessibility resource.

The curricula currently contains:

The intention is to have the content author modules ready for publication by early June, so the work is quite time sensitive. For context, see Draft schedule for content author modules.

This survey collects feedback on overall module structure for the content author modules. Objective: To address major structural issues and missing content as soon as possible to finalize module structure and topics.

Estimated review time: Short-Medium. Focus only on the overall content breakdown.

Details

Responder Comments
Sylvie Duchateau
Shadi Abou-Zahra
Laura Keen
Estella Oncins All modules mention:

"collaborate with designers and developers to achieve the desired visual presentation of multi-column content using styles instead of layout tables". No mention about involving users is provided.
Dónal Fitzpatrick
Brian Elton
Mark Palmer
David Sloan
Sarah Lewthwaite -
Carlos Duarte
Kris Anne Kinney
Kevin White Looking good!!!
Sharron Rush Good work overall. A few suggestions included in GitHub
Jade Matos Carew
Howard Kramer
Brent Bakken
Michele Williams
Jennifer Chadwick

2. Review level

summary | by responder | by choice

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed it thoroughly. 12
I skimmed it. 3
I pass on this review, and will not request structural changes later. 1
I need more time, and will complete this by the date in the comment field below. 1

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Review levelComments
Sylvie Duchateau
  • I skimmed it.
Shadi Abou-Zahra
  • I skimmed it.
Laura Keen
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Estella Oncins
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
 There is a missing explanation at the beginning of the module maybe it's in a work in progress?
"https://content-author-modules--wai-curricula.netlify.app/curricula/content-author-modules/"
Dónal Fitzpatrick
Brian Elton
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Mark Palmer
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
David Sloan
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Sarah Lewthwaite
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
 -
Carlos Duarte
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Kris Anne Kinney
  • I pass on this review, and will not request structural changes later.
 I tried to get through it and my day just derailed and I'm so very sorry. Wanted to submit it with my feedback on Module 1 at least. The other names seem fine to me, and I will not comment on structural changes going forward.
Kevin White
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Sharron Rush
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Jade Matos Carew
  • I need more time, and will complete this by the date in the comment field below.
 So sorry, I can get to this on Wednesday/Thursday and I'd really like the time to review it properly.
Howard Kramer
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Brent Bakken
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Michele Williams
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Jennifer Chadwick
  • I skimmed it.
 I reviewed each of the modules, the sections and topics - paying close attention to the structure of the content presented.

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I reviewed it thoroughly.
  • Laura Keen
  • Estella Oncins
  • Brian Elton
  • Mark Palmer
  • David Sloan
  • Sarah Lewthwaite
  • Carlos Duarte
  • Kevin White
  • Sharron Rush
  • Howard Kramer
  • Brent Bakken
  • Michele Williams
I skimmed it.
  • Sylvie Duchateau
  • Shadi Abou-Zahra
  • Jennifer Chadwick
I pass on this review, and will not request structural changes later.
  • Kris Anne Kinney
I need more time, and will complete this by the date in the comment field below.
  • Jade Matos Carew

3. Module 1: Content Clarity

Please have a look at Module 1: Content Clarity

  • Do you think this is the right module title?
  • Do you think all topics are covered in the existing learning outcomes
  • What other suggestions do you have about possible module title and learning outcomes

Please provide your comments in the below box or via GitHub Issue on Module 1: Content Clarity.

Details

Responder Comments
Sylvie Duchateau May there could also be a topic explaining how to valuate your work?
How can check if your content is clear.
Which fonts best suit readability.
Give hints on how the text shoud be displayed to make it easier to read.
Shadi Abou-Zahra
Laura Keen I'm not sure if it's the right title although I can't come up with anything better. I'd be interested to hear what others come up with. I think the learning outcomes cover the idea that writing for people with disabilities helps everyone.
Estella Oncins I would rather prefer “Clear content” also inline with the designers' module (Visual design/Information design/…) but I leave it to editors discretion.

In the learning outcomes, I would recommend adding:
1. Selecting an appropriate font (sans serif)
2. The term “colour” (in appropriate contrast ratio for content)
3. Avoid complex language/words, use short sentences, use active language rather than passive language.
4. Mention to punctuation, special characters and abbreviations could also be provided.

Dónal Fitzpatrick This title is fine, however given that the module also addresses aspects relating to usability might I put forward the suggestion that the title be amended to "content clarity and usability". As noted, I have no significant problem with the title as it currently stands and merely offer this as a discussion point.
Brian Elton I think we should pull back a bit on "use text alternatives to help understand content from images and other graphics" and possibly "ensure content grouping and spacing to communicate sections" as they are covered in the two modules that follow this one. I think this module should focus on language and understandability of the words themselves (which definitely includes "use iconography to help understand text content"), not how that language is structured or the variety of ways to write alternative text for images.
I see the content clarity module as how the content is presented without considering alternative text or accessible names, etc. "When reading this piece of text, does it use easy to understand language or language appropriate to the audience." Then in the subsequent modules, these writing principles can be extended to how this language can be used when writing alternative text or form labels, etc.
Mark Palmer Yes.
David Sloan The module title doesn't sound quite right to me, but I can't immediately think of alternatives.

The learning outcomes use the verb "ensure" to group a set of design qualities. I don't think ensure is an appropriate verb to include in a learning outcome, given successful implementation of these features for a design will most likely rely on a successful partnership with others in a team. Perhaps it would be more appropriate to use a specific verb for each item in the list that follows, eg "specify", "select" "define" for the respective list items?

A learning outcome for color contrast seems out of scope for this module.
Sarah Lewthwaite Would 'Clear content' be more direct and understandable as a title? Issues around appropriate/inclusive language came up at a recent Taskforce meeting, for example: in discussing disability. I appreciate this brings cultural specificity into play, but could this be identified as potential learning outcome and issue for teachers to address within this topic? If this hasn't been discussed already by EOWG I think this would benefit from consideration.
Carlos Duarte
Kris Anne Kinney Having trouble with a section about clear content with a name like Content Clarity. Clarity feels like a complex word when we want to convey that they should use simple words where possible. I don't have a better suggestion for the module title right now, I'm hoping one will come to me and I will share it. But just putting it out there that this is not sitting right in my brain. Maybe its that it feels a bit like a tongue twister? I'm trying to put my finger on why.
Kevin White Comments in github
Sharron Rush A bit of concern with the title, comments in Github
Jade Matos Carew
Howard Kramer Yes on right title.
Yes on topics covered.
I did notice that some topics, such as iconography and text alternatives are mentioned in module learning outcomes but not addressed in the module.
Brent Bakken Added to GitHub.
Michele Williams Put in GitHub (thanks for the really helpful link!).
Jennifer Chadwick The content is clearly defined, for me - what is the topic, how it relates to the learning outcomes of each module, and why it's important that this information and training be included in the curricula.

I have no other comments or concerns with each module. I'm excited by this course as a reusable and effective resource in my own training.

I feel very aligned with the materials, objectives and goals. This helps me to structure all of the learning into a manageable curriculum and meaningful learning path.

4. Module 2: Content Structure

Please have a look at Module 2: Content Structure

  • Do you think this is the right module title?
  • Do you think all topics are covered in the existing learning outcomes
  • What other suggestions do you have about possible module title and learning outcomes

Please provide your comments in the below box or via GitHub Issue on Module 2: Content Structure.

Details

Responder Comments
Sylvie Duchateau Like in previous module, showing students how to evaluate their work. Which tools could be used?

Give examples of bad and good practices and let them determine if these examples a good or not.
Shadi Abou-Zahra
Laura Keen The title is good. The topics covered appear to be comprehensive.
Estella Oncins Following the previous rationale, I would propose “Structure content”

Not clear if the concept of "markup" is known within the content author community.

Maybe add:

1. Make sure the important information is easy to find.
2. Use bullet points to list things
3. Ensure text alignment to the left of the page.
4. Leave space between paragraphs
5. Provide guidance on how to move between the different pages of a website

"Links" is provided as a topic in the teaching ideas in relation to "move between the different pages of a website" but it is not included as a learning outcome.
Dónal Fitzpatrick This is most definitely a worthwhile module as content authors will rely on the techniques proposed to structure content. I wonder could some of the material/content in the Page Structure module found as part of the Developer curriculum be re-purposed to work here? Notwithstanding the different focus of both modules, significant work was carried out to develop this resource and it might expedite matters to avail of work already completed.
Brian Elton Does proper grouping of content belong here, as an extension of using structural elements like headings, lists, etc.? There is a bit of a blur between this being a content clarity thing or a content structure thing.
Mark Palmer Yes. Content Structure is a clear title and all topics that I would cover are indeed covered.
David Sloan This one looks good to me
Sarah Lewthwaite Do we want learning outcomes here discussing handling text of different length? I'm thinking specifically about content and implicit issues such as internal page navigation for longer texts. Headings cover part of this, but are there additional learning outcomes about managing longer content that could or should sit here?
Carlos Duarte
Kris Anne Kinney
Kevin White Comments in github
Sharron Rush Comments in GitHub
Jade Matos Carew
Howard Kramer I wonder if a better title would be "Content Structure & Semantics"
Yes
Brent Bakken Added to GitHub.
Michele Williams No comments here.
Jennifer Chadwick

5. Module 3: Images

Please have a look at Module 3: Images

  • Do you think this is the right module title?
  • Do you think all topics are covered in the existing learning outcomes
  • What other suggestions do you have about possible module title and learning outcomes

Please provide your comments in the below box or via GitHub Issue on Module 3: Images.

Details

Responder Comments
Sylvie Duchateau Add tips on how to evaluate students work.
Give examples of good and bad practices and ask students what they think about these examples, are they ok, not ok and why?
Shadi Abou-Zahra
Laura Keen The title works. I couldn't get to the page. It was red "Deceptive site ahead"
Estella Oncins Maybe it is worth reviewing and aligning the different types of images described in existing WAI resources https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/ also in relation to the "alt Decision Tree".
Dónal Fitzpatrick This module is excellent. I think it is hugely important as many of the issues we face on the web today arise from a lack of knowledge on how to convey this type of material. I have no issues with this module.
Brian Elton "Employ tools that produce appropriate markup for text alternatives" sounds like we are suggesting Artificial Intelligence tools, when I don't think that was the intention.
Perhaps another, more general learning outcome of "Students should be able to employ content clarity principles to the writing of alternative text"
Mark Palmer Yes. Common terminology.
David Sloan This one looks good to me, with one thought—there is a strong bias towards alternatives for images, so perhaps there's scope to encourage students to learn about appropriate selection of images to help illustrate text for people who may have difficulty reading? I aprpeciate this doens't directly map to any WCAG SC, so may be more challenging to address, but I think it's important to have some general coverage that for some users, alternatives to text help enhance accessibility of experience. (this is a separate topic to designing for people who use symbol based communication)
Sarah Lewthwaite Title: previous titles are 'content clarity' 'content structure' - this is just 'images', not 'image content'. Do we want to align titles?
Carlos Duarte
Kris Anne Kinney
Kevin White Comments in github
Sharron Rush Do we want to say Image Content to distinguish it from Image Design or is that assumed? additional comment in GitHub
Jade Matos Carew
Howard Kramer I wonder if "Images & Graphics" would be more accurate.
Yes, but alt text and icons are also mentioned in module 1
Brent Bakken Added to GitHub.
Michele Williams In GitHub
Jennifer Chadwick

6. Module 4: Data Tables

Please have a look at Module 4: Data Tables

  • Do you think this is the right module title?
  • Do you think all topics are covered in the existing learning outcomes
  • What other suggestions do you have about possible module title and learning outcomes

Please provide your comments in the below box or via GitHub Issue on Module 4: Data Tables.

Details

Responder Comments
Sylvie Duchateau Not sure whether the module is only related to web pages or can it also include making accessible documents.
If creating accessible documents included, may be add an item explaining that when converting a document to another format (for example from Word to PDF), table tagging may be removed and it may be necessary to repair table structure.
Again, an item should be deicated to how to evaluate that tables have been developed properly.
Also a topic concerning the complexity of tables should be added: complex tables are difficult to make accessible than several simple tables.
Shadi Abou-Zahra
Laura Keen The title works. The learning outcomes are robust. I don't have additional suggestions.
Estella Oncins Should "Forms" also be included?
Dónal Fitzpatrick This module again is excellent. I would like to suggest the inclusion (or emphasis) of the fact that tables should be used for the purposes of conveying relationships between data elements and not for layout. For example: many people use tables to lay forms out correctly when using wordprocessors to prepare forms for completion by users.
Brian Elton If we are keeping the perspective that the audience for this module could be those that are acting as designers, writers and developers, the note about layout tables should be reframed. Perhaps even a higher level item, such as "Students should be able to explain the difference between a data table and a layout table and why the latter should be avoided."
Mark Palmer Yes.
David Sloan This looks good to me.
Sarah Lewthwaite Are Tables referred to as Data Tables elsewhere in curricula? Would 'Table content' work as a title here? There is an assumption in the learning outcomes that tables can supply an equivalent to other graphical forms, and this is not always the case (for example, Sankey's diagrams which show data in relationships), would such graphical forms be considered more as 'multimedia'? May need careful handling/useful examples or problem based teaching ideas to generate thinking on these nuanced issues.
Carlos Duarte
Kris Anne Kinney
Kevin White Comments in github
Sharron Rush Good, nothing to add here.
Jade Matos Carew
Howard Kramer Module title is fine
Yes on topics
On the fence whether this belongs under Content Author Modules
Brent Bakken Added to GitHub.
Michele Williams In GitHub
Jennifer Chadwick

7. Module 5: Multimedia

Please have a look at Module 5: Multimedia

  • Do you think this is the right module title?
  • Do you think all topics are covered in the existing learning outcomes
  • What other suggestions do you have about possible module title and learning outcomes

Please provide your comments in the below box or via GitHub Issue on Module 5: Multimedia.

Details

Responder Comments
Sylvie Duchateau No particular comments.
Shadi Abou-Zahra
Laura Keen The title works. The learning outcomes are sufficient. I don't have additional suggestions.
Estella Oncins In the learning outcomes "provide transcripts for audio content to help people who cannot hear the audio" maybe reformulate it into "provide text alternatives such as captions and transcripts to help people who cannot hear the audio"

Also maybe add mention to seizure problems?
Dónal Fitzpatrick I lack relevant expertise to provide in-depth comment on this module, however given this lack of knowledge on my part it seems fine.
Brian Elton An additional learning outcome around knowing how to generate captions/audio descriptions, etc. for media content that they did not create themselves. The idea of know what tools exist to help in this (auto-generated captions, for instance - knowing how to get them and what still may need to be done to them before they can be used).

FYI - the navigation that is normally adjacent to the content is missing in this module (perhaps a missed snippet inclusion?)
Mark Palmer Obviously multimedia is a long established term for audio and video content. Somehow though, for me it feels dated. How "multi" is the media? If this is just Audio and Video then perhaps labelling it as such is clearer.
David Sloan This looks good to me.
Sarah Lewthwaite Could audio description and sign language be usefully identified within this topic a potential avenues for extension tasks in Teaching Ideas around pursuing accessibility collaboratively? ie. students identify ways to engage broader audiences, and prepare students to work collaboratively with accessibility specialists such as SL interpreters and audio describers?
Carlos Duarte
Kris Anne Kinney
Kevin White Comments in github
Sharron Rush Is there a missing word here? "transcripts for people who cannot hear the audio or see the visuals get the information"

I do think the topics are well covered bu the language is not at all clear. Seems a bit dependent on jargon, too many compound phrases, and can be greatly simplified overall.
Jade Matos Carew
Howard Kramer Yes.
Yes.
None.
Brent Bakken Added to GitHub.
Michele Williams In GitHub
Jennifer Chadwick

8. Module 6: Labels and Instructions

Please have a look at Module 6: Labels and Instructions

  • Do you think this is the right module title?
  • Do you think all topics are covered in the existing learning outcomes
  • What other suggestions do you have about possible module title and learning outcomes

Please provide your comments in the below box or via GitHub Issue on Module 6: Labels and Instructions.

Details

Responder Comments
Sylvie Duchateau No particular comments.
Shadi Abou-Zahra
Laura Keen The title works. The labels module seems to need more work compared to the other modules. When I think about labels I think about forms. I realize that speaking about labels in the context of content authoring needs to be more generalized but I still wonder if we need to mention forms specifically.
Estella Oncins
Dónal Fitzpatrick I feel that the four principles: Perceivable, OPerable, Understandable and Robust are crucial in this module in particular. The labels here can/will be used in conjuction with interactive elements so I think that it might be worth relating the learning outcomes back to those key areas. Overall I think they read well and contain the necessary material.
Brian Elton An additional outcome around not using sensory characteristics in instructions would be good (or a sub-point of "provide textual and visual instructions that describe the overall purpose and intent of the content")
Mark Palmer Yes
David Sloan This looks good, with a couple of observations:
1. Error messages are mentioned in the learning outcomes, but not (yet) in the draft topics to teach
2. Will notifications (e.g toast alerts) be covered in this module as well?
Sarah Lewthwaite Coul Labels and Instructions come earlier in the module sequence, given the close relation to Content Structure?
Carlos Duarte
Kris Anne Kinney
Kevin White Comments in github
Sharron Rush The title is good, the language of the LOs again needs to be more simple and clear. One specific comment in GitHub
Jade Matos Carew
Howard Kramer Yes.
Yes.
I found the action to "employ tools to ..." in all the modules unclear. Since no examples are provided I'm not sure what it means here and elsewhere.
Brent Bakken Added to GitHub.
Michele Williams In GitHub
Jennifer Chadwick

More details on responses

  • Sylvie Duchateau: last responded on 4, March 2022 at 15:30 (UTC)
  • Shadi Abou-Zahra: last responded on 7, March 2022 at 08:50 (UTC)
  • Laura Keen: last responded on 7, March 2022 at 12:51 (UTC)
  • Estella Oncins: last responded on 7, March 2022 at 18:29 (UTC)
  • Dónal Fitzpatrick: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 09:01 (UTC)
  • Brian Elton: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 15:19 (UTC)
  • Mark Palmer: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 15:29 (UTC)
  • David Sloan: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 16:59 (UTC)
  • Sarah Lewthwaite: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 17:09 (UTC)
  • Carlos Duarte: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 17:54 (UTC)
  • Kris Anne Kinney: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 18:54 (UTC)
  • Kevin White: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 20:19 (UTC)
  • Sharron Rush: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 20:45 (UTC)
  • Jade Matos Carew: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 21:23 (UTC)
  • Howard Kramer: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 21:34 (UTC)
  • Brent Bakken: last responded on 8, March 2022 at 23:06 (UTC)
  • Michele Williams: last responded on 9, March 2022 at 02:31 (UTC)
  • Jennifer Chadwick: last responded on 9, March 2022 at 22:41 (UTC)

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Eric Velleman
  2. Andrew Arch
  3. Shawn Lawton Henry
  4. Kazuhito Kidachi
  5. Jedi Lin
  6. Mary Jo Mueller
  7. Vicki Menezes Miller
  8. Reinaldo Ferraz
  9. Bill Kasdorf
  10. Cristina Mussinelli
  11. Kevin White
  12. Kevin Rydberg
  13. Adina Halter
  14. Denis Boudreau
  15. Sarah Pulis
  16. Bill Tyler
  17. Gregorio Pellegrino
  18. Ruoxi Ran
  19. Sean Kelly
  20. Muhammad Saleem
  21. Daniel Montalvo
  22. Sonsoles López Pernas
  23. Greta Krafsig
  24. Jason McKee
  25. Jayne Schurick
  26. Billie Johnston
  27. Shikha Nikhil Dwivedi
  28. Julianna Rowsell
  29. Tabitha Mahoney
  30. Fred Edora
  31. Rabab Gomaa
  32. Marcelo Paiva
  33. Eloisa Guerrero
  34. Leonard Beasley
  35. Frankie Wolf
  36. Supriya Makude
  37. Aleksandar Cindrikj
  38. 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.