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 address: shawn@w3.org
This questionnaire was open from 2020-01-21 to 2020-01-28.
11 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
summary | by responder | by choice
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I reviewed these thoroughly. | 6 |
I skimmed them. | 4 |
I can review and comment by the date below. | |
I pass on this review, and accept the decisions of the Working Group. |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Review level | Comments |
---|---|---|
Hidde de Vries |
|
|
Sylvie Duchateau |
|
|
Kris Anne Kinney | ||
Eric Eggert |
|
|
Kevin White |
|
|
Brent Bakken |
|
Thank you for the chance for a final review. |
Shawn Lawton Henry |
|
|
Mark Palmer |
|
|
Daniel Montalvo |
|
|
Laura Keen |
|
|
Lewis Phillips |
|
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I reviewed these thoroughly. |
|
I skimmed them. |
|
I can review and comment by the date below. | |
I pass on this review, and accept the decisions of the Working Group. |
summary | by responder | by choice
See the context and proposed icons in the Assistive Technology Icons wiki page section.
Notes:
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I support using all of these icons as is. | 8 |
[ED] I support using these icons, and have input for editor's discretion — in the Comments below. | 3 |
[!!] I do not support using one or more of these icons, as explained in the Comments below. | |
I abstain (not vote) and accept the decisions of the Working Group. | 1 |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Assistive Technology Icons | Comments |
---|---|---|
Hidde de Vries |
|
I'm a little confused by what's happening in the 'Keyboard' icon. could potentially look more keyboard-like with more keys and without WiFi icon? Something like this: https://cdn2.iconfinder.com/data/icons/personal-computers-outline/512/keyboard_computer_hardware-512.png (editor's discretion!) |
Sylvie Duchateau |
|
|
Kris Anne Kinney |
|
|
Eric Eggert |
|
I like them all. Very in our style. |
Kevin White |
|
Ok, I think I missed the approval of these icons so my comments can be considered minor, unless the icons are being considered for widespread use in which case I would be more concerned. CC, test size, Braille and keyboard all have a box. The box is the same width but different heights. There are two things that jar: the line weight of each box is different, and the corner edging differs for Braille and keyboard. This may not be an issue if they are not to be shown together that much but the inconsistency jars when they are shown together. I thin kthe CC one is fine, the other three could be brought more inline. Not sure why the keyboard has wi-fi signal bars. I know wireless keyboards exist but icons are more commonly shown with a wire or with nothing. Not sure why they keyboard keys look peculiar - I would have expected something cleaner, for example https://cdn2.iconfinder.com/data/icons/personal-computers-outline/512/keyboard_computer_hardware-512.png The volume control icon has too harsh edging. This is particularly apparent when compared with the keyboard, text phone, and Braille icons. More rounded edging might look a bit better. This example has the rounding for the edging matches the wireless lines: https://yt3.ggpht.com/-uvLtAIh5W6s/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/pUSqOChpgIs/s900-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg |
Brent Bakken |
|
I like the color chosen for these icons. I think the weight of the lines and detail is good. I support the use of all six icons as needed throughout the videos. |
Shawn Lawton Henry |
|
AT2: Text Resize [ED-low] There could be even more differentiation between the size of the letters. [ED-low] I’m used to the letters not touching. Looks like there’s plenty of room for them not to touch. My opinion on which work best in this context: 1. Closed Captions 2. Text Resize 3. Braille 4. Text Telephone 5. Keyboard 6. Volume Control |
Mark Palmer |
|
|
Daniel Montalvo |
|
|
Laura Keen |
|
|
Lewis Phillips |
|
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I support using all of these icons as is. |
|
[ED] I support using these icons, and have input for editor's discretion — in the Comments below. |
|
[!!] I do not support using one or more of these icons, as explained in the Comments below. | |
I abstain (not vote) and accept the decisions of the Working Group. |
|
summary | by responder | by choice
Video 4 download is the final version of the visual content.
Notes:
Changes:
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I support these visuals as is. | 9 |
[ED] I support using these visuals, and have input for editor's discretion — in the Comments below. | 1 |
[!!] I do not support these visuals, as explained in the Comments below. | 1 |
I abstain (not vote) and accept the decisions of the Working Group. |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Video 4 Visual | Comments |
---|---|---|
Hidde de Vries |
|
|
Sylvie Duchateau |
|
|
Kris Anne Kinney |
|
|
Eric Eggert |
|
I love it! The rocket animation is great! One NON BLOCKING nit pick: When the arrow next to the WCAG bar dissolves, it it shown that the stem and the triangle overlap as they both get transparent. It would be nice (and more professional looking) if this was not visible: https://i.imgur.com/xSuL3cW.png AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A BLOCKING COMMENT. DO **NOT** BLOCK. PUBLISH. |
Kevin White |
|
Looks good |
Brent Bakken |
|
- I like the changes to the WCAG column and arrow advancing up. However, some small adjustments are needed. When the column and arrow fade out, the arrow-head and the arrow-line fade out at a different rate (17 seconds). It is a bit awkward looking as this arrow should be one object. Instead it is like the arrow-head and arrow-column are two separate parts of that one object. Please group them so that the entire arrow fades out. Also, seems like the arrow-head is not exactly centered on top of the arrow-line. Seems a little to the left of the line. |
Shawn Lawton Henry |
|
I have several comments. They are all optional -- for [ED]/Project-Manager-Shadi/EOWG-participants to decide what to do with. (Although I don't want to incur extra costs, I think some changes shouldn't incur extra costs, because the animators really did not implement them well at all -- e.g., 1:50 is still *paper* not a computer form.) If the project manager and Working Group want to call this video done, that is fine with me. Or, if we want to publish this version now and continue to tweak, that is even better. :-) I did not go over the comments submitted to the animators. Comments below are based on my memory, which could be wrong. [ED-medium/high] 0:36-0:39 (spaceship) This is way more complex than it should be, it is distracting, and does not match the concept of the text/narration/information structure. Fundamentally – that is, according to the verbal/transcript information -- the spaceship should be the same at the previous items – it is the 5th bullet in the list. I was (mildly) OK with the other items going along conveyor belt into the rocket and it taking off. However, this iteration has way too much movement and change in context – all in just a couple of seconds: * the 4 items (that should be the same as the spaceship) going to new scene, shrinking, and moving positions from a horizontal line to a 2x2 grid * a big spaceship appearing * the 4 now-small items flying into the spaceship * the spaceship shaking back & forth * the spaceship igniting * the spaceship taking off That complex visual took all my (limited) attention, and I did not hear what was being said. [disclaimer: I’m not good at processing such different audio and visual info at the same time. Many people can.] [ED-medium] 0:56-0:58 leave the “people with disabilities use the web” image of people in front of computers longer (that’s an important point! :-) and delay showing the odd box for a second or more later [ED-low] 1:49 We asked for this to look like a computer form, afaik. While they changed the internal animation, it still has the overall dimensions of paper and the top-right corner folded -- that both effectively convey PAPER and not online form. [ED-low] 0:05 I envisioned the arrow *inside* of the bar (and thicker). [ED-low/EOWG] 1:54-1:56 The movement of the icons is still too much for my currently fried brain. I understand that it will be fine for most people -- I think EOWG participants already said it was fine for most of them. I just wanted to note it. (Most with my currently-fried-brain that won’t rely on the videos anyway, so OK. :-) Re-iteration: If the project manager and Working Group want to call this video done, that is fine with me. (Or, if we want to publish this version now, and continue to tweak, that is even better. :-) |
Mark Palmer |
|
|
Daniel Montalvo |
|
|
Laura Keen |
|
|
Lewis Phillips |
|
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I support these visuals as is. |
|
[ED] I support using these visuals, and have input for editor's discretion — in the Comments below. |
|
[!!] I do not support these visuals, as explained in the Comments below. |
|
I abstain (not vote) and accept the decisions of the Working Group. |
summary | by responder | by choice
See the proposed endplate.You can see it in action in the video in the previous question. Does this implement the changes that we asked for in layout and content?
Note that one endplate is shown, and the same layout would be used for the other videos.
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
I support this endplate. | 10 |
[ED] I support this endplate, and have input for editor's discretion — in the Comments below. | 1 |
[!!] I do not support this endplate, as explained in the Comments below. | |
I abstain (not vote) and accept the decisions of the Working Group. |
Skip to view by choice.
Responder | Endplate | Comments |
---|---|---|
Hidde de Vries |
|
|
Sylvie Duchateau |
|
|
Kris Anne Kinney |
|
|
Eric Eggert |
|
Perfect! |
Kevin White |
|
|
Brent Bakken |
|
Looks good. |
Shawn Lawton Henry |
|
(I don't remember the changes we asked for.) [ED-high] In the latest video 4 (above), the audio and visual timing is wrong and creates cognitive confusion for my poor tired brain. But maybe it was changed in the actual voice-over that was recorded? Audio currently says: “Visit w3.org/W-A-I/evaluation for more information on conformance evaluation of web accessibility.” Visual during that time is typing out Conformance Evaluation w3.org/W-A-I/evaluation So the visual and the audio are opposite. Script says: “For information on web accessibility conformance evaluation, visit w3.o-r-g/W-A-I/evaluation.” Which would match the current visual OK. Depending on what the final voice-over says, I’d have different suggestions for what to do with animation of text… |
Mark Palmer |
|
|
Daniel Montalvo |
|
|
Laura Keen |
|
|
Lewis Phillips |
|
Choice | Responders |
---|---|
I support this endplate. |
|
[ED] I support this endplate, and have input for editor's discretion — in the Comments below. |
|
[!!] I do not support this endplate, as explained in the Comments below. | |
I abstain (not vote) and accept the decisions of the Working Group. |
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
.