UT May 2015/Session Feedback/Quickref

From Education & Outreach

Findings

EOWG discussion minutes 14 May 2015 (f2f Austin, TX)

  • UI needs improvements
  • Tagging-based filtering more appropriate
    • Remove search?
    • Remove almost all filters but “Levels” and “Technologies”
  • Hide non-relevant success criteria
  • Order success criteria so they “make more sense”, for example group both contrast requirement SCs when the tag “color” is selected
  • Show only relevant techniques for this tag
  • Hide ”complications“, like lists of exceptions or details.
  • Link to tutorials
  • Link to internal resources
  • Consider hiding techniques that don’t exist “(future link)”
  • FUTURE: Link to external resources
  • FUTURE: Link to components gallery
  • FUTURE: Link to eval tools list

Challenges

  • What tags should be used?
  • Who will add tags?
  • Who will keep tags up to date? [In the future they might just come with the ]
  • How do we display information so that it is easily usable - especially for people who are new and looking for specific info?

Individual Feedback Reports

Brent

  • 2 People, opposite end of the spectrum, beginner & expert
  • Beginner: What are abstract words? Perceivable, Understandable, Operable, Robust
    • Bug: Sidebar not scrolling
    • Language too technical.
    • Content person, looking for audio description, opens WCAG 2.0
  • Expert:
    • Want to use filter, as you don’t know what you’re searching for.
    • If you don’t know about what to search.
    • No way to deselect all in a category.
    • Clear all in the popup.
    • Bug: Close popup by keyboard.
    • Liked tasks/components.
    • Devices: Where is laptop/desktop?!
    • Only button wasn’t clear.
    • Didn’t get what the filtered out means.
    • Filtered, got back to the page scrolled down and looked into the techniques.
      • Example: Chose CSS, was confused about what was there.
    • It didn’t show what changed as people don’t know the techniques.
    • Relationship between techniques and success criteria and filters not clear.
    • Filters bar looks like clickable.
    • Everything should be collapsed at the beginning.
    • Understanding also doesn’t open in the page.
    • Restrict width.
    • Liked different icons. Looked too similar.
    • Tools across the top: Save icon not working, what does save do?!
    • Blue to stark, too much attention grabbing.
    • Didn’t understand techniques for guidelines.
    • Organization of the show techniques perfect
  • Both: Don’t understand filters and/or search, both are important. Different preferences.

Kevin

  • About 5 participants
  • Webdevs
  • UX people
  • Wide span in expertise, some people from section 508, transitioning to WCAG
  • Different needs
  • Key themes: Not coming from the guidelines to the solution but from the problem to the solution to the guidelines.
    • Not responding to the workflow.
  • UX type people:
    • We got a set of guidelines to follow, how does it map to that. Were open to use it as is.
  • Filters & Relationship completely gone, pretty much everybody
  • Two types of filters: Techniques and success criteria. Needs more clear how they work.
  • A specific point: I don’t have any audiovisual on the site, get rid from this.
  • Filter out time based media no only on a success criteria level but also certain pieces in other success criteria. For example in 1.1.1 there is time based media and that should be filtered out if I uncheck it.
  • Techniques: They did not have a clue what techniques are, but the content of techniques was exactly what they wanted.
  • Only was liked by one person, clear all in the filter page is missing.
  • Search: Very view used it, visibility fine, but they liked filters better.
    • Was question: Why is stuff hidden, why can’t I see this.
    • One person that said just use ctrl+F and search.
  • Component filtering very specific, like Checkbox.
  • In techniques: G93 is a database ID, don’t care about this. Shouldn’t be in the interface.
  • High expertise usability background person’s comments:
    • Just WCAG with a pretty interface, nothing new.
    • How to Meet WCAG 2.0, not the right title. It doesn’t say do this, do this, do this.
    • Definitions in text very distracting, links go to WCAG.
    • Lots of stuff about terminology: Success criteria, guidelines
      • Examples instead of techniques
    • Use natural language!
    • Too complicated. [Might be specific to ]
    • Hide/Show techniques good.
    • Failure techniques too wordy. [Failure of Success Criterion 1.1.1 and 1.2.1]
    • If it wasn’t WAI, ripping apart Success Critera would be OK.
  • Generally value in the quickref

Eric

  • External links were surprising
  • Search/filter bar was not seen at all
  • Didn‘t see the only button in the filters
  • Expected a global search and wondered why ARIA wouldn’t yield any results
  • search contrast
  • Mark external links
  • Add a share link to be able to quickly send out hints to developers

Howard

  • UX expert
  • Didn’t understand chain icon.
  • Familiar with WCAG
  • Headings standing out
  • Listing all techniques confusing, sufficient techniques not useful
  • Designed for blind users, could be more designed.
  • Level tag too far off to the right.
  • Terminology, suggested more details, she didn’t know what things mean.
  • Too many links in paragraphs.
  • Obsession with blue.
  • Reinforces that accessible design is bad looking design.
  • Clear all made her nervous.
  • Would like to see code snippets and examples.
  • She didn’t like the understanding link in context to the techniques.
  • Didn’t know what advisory techniques are.
  • Why are contrast things not grouped properly.
  • Language easier!
  • Links to tools would be useful
  • Failures not expected under techniques
  • Braille should be capitalized
  • Didn’t think location of clear filters.

James

Wayne

  • People searching for an entry point to get into the WCAG system

Shawn

  • It’s really good looking, more welcoming, positive feedback on the visuals.
  • Recognition that this was an update of the old quickref.
  • Buggy left navigation menu. People want that the overview menu scroll with the page.
  • Nobody found the filters.
  • One person said: It said customizable, but I can’t find filters. [Potentially related to the mockup warning. Shawn started it under the warning.]
  • One tried to type to the items filtered out.
  • Search: Wow, surprising. Scary!
    • “Help!!!!!”
  • One didn’t see search results
  • Like the way the levels were indicated
  • Couple didn’t see the filters.
  • Didn’t see the filters.
  • FILTER NO SEE!
  • NOT SEEN!
  • Loved left navigation.
  • Contrast separated confusing.
  • Minor thing: Bug: Hide techniques should be there.
  • Back and forth between filters and tool.
  • Didn’t know what’s sufficient/advisory. Person should knew.
  • Some people did move to outside links just fine. [Kevin agrees.]
  • Techniques for guidelines and future techniques weren’t fully understood.

Shadi

  • Some people uncheck Level A.
Retrieved from "https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/index.php?title=UT_May_2015/Session_Feedback/Quickref&oldid=12928"