[Cato] ACT feedback

[Jess Thompson]

My notes are in the Google doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VHFr-Uk0_1eg7tyOO5kxDqSm6_sXq-DJzBY9ApJA6rg/edit?usp=sharing>, but I'm emailing as well.

I did a video of my walkthrough when I went in as a paid subscriber: https://screencast-o-matic.com/watch/cF1jFbFVrR


  *   I find the submit and products pages too similar. The populated list on the submit page does not let me add myself/school as a user of the product, it just takes me to the results (that’s not aiding in submitting).

  *   Clicking on “compliance requirements” in the products page didn’t take me anywhere.

  *   Under Products page (should this be titled something else? Product Evaluation?) I don’t understand why I’d select a college from a list when trying to see the list of colleges where a product is in use.

  *   I have a lot of strong opinions about how the testing info is defined and I feel very strongly this needs to be taken out or modified before piloting. We’re setting an expectation that I do not think is going to be compatible with the methodology defined by the trusted tester training we’re working on. Releasing it now with that format/language is going to give ideas (which will be seen as suggestions) for how to test and I guarantee some schools will start following that approach.

  *   When a user cannot type in a box shouldn’t there be some indicator/message explaining why they can’t? It seems like that would be an accessibility thing…

  *   I was able to mark a product not compliant when it was already marked not assessed.  -- it doesn’t stick, but it sure gives the impression that I’m able to make claims. Maybe those shouldn’t be buttons for people who just have permissions to view-only

[https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/oyY03RKdAtJ1e_uSk-xBV5HofZHmgrOpQNcqknBqhzy4jkoD8nRJT_E92K5XXW1DzwN5E9FLSqwXOHc5fg4KJ9XCTI-cMM7qUyqPCiim2wbaHwk3nWE-Fufy0sWFsBhH7m55cvuY]

  *   What are WCAG files? I’ve never heard of this.

  *   508 compliance should be removed. It’s redundant and 508 does not apply to us, only to Federal gov’t (despite what testing vendors claim -- only trust .gov sites on this as vendors are using it to drum up business).

  *   I'm also uncomfortable with screen reader testing section. I think it should be cut.

  *   Overall, for now, I think we need to greatly limit the entire page about product results. Maybe even remove it until we actually have something in place for getting things tested. There are going to be a lot of people that see that and get angry that nothing's been tested - and rather than pay attention to why and what we're working on, they're going to freak out and complain.




Jess Thompson
Program Administrator, Accessible Technology Initiatives
Washington State Board for Community & Technical Colleges
p: 360.704.4327 | c: 253.229.8591
Current Projects<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KXjxctpTAa2R06iRksMrjaeiCkphAJzqkwX-awvJh9g/edit?usp=sharing> | AccessWA Blog<https://accesswa.blog> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KXjxctpTAa2R06iRksMrjaeiCkphAJzqkwX-awvJh9g/edit?usp=sharing>

Keep in the accessibility loop by joining the CTC Accessibility listserv<https://goo.gl/forms/CP1GHPl6Pe1ipD6q1>!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ctc.edu/pipermail/cato_lists.ctc.edu/attachments/20180608/011cbcc6/attachment-0002.html>