Open Stack

Hi Doug,

On 24/04/14 16:06, Douglas Fish wrote:
> 
> I've proposed a design session for accessibility for the Juno summit, and
> I'd like to get a discussion started on the work that needs to be done.
> (Thanks Julie P for pushing that!)

Thanks for starting the conversation!

> I've started to add information to the wiki that Joonwon Lee created:
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Horizon/WebAccessibility
> I think that's going to be a good place to gather material.  I'd like to
> see additional information added about what tools we can use to verify
> accessibility.  I'd like to try to summarize the WCAG guidelines into some
> broad areas where Horzion needs work.  I expect to add a checklist of
> accessibility-related items to consider while reviewing code.

This is a really good action item, the Review Checklist [1] definitely
needs to be updated with Horizon-specific items.

> Joonwon (or anyone else with an interest in accessibility):  It would be
> great if you could re-inspect the icehouse level code and create bugs for
> any issues that remain.  I'll do the same for issues that I am aware of.
> In each bug we should include a link to the WCAG guideline that has been
> violated.  Also, we should describe the testing technique:  How was this
> bug discovered?  How could a developer (or reviewer) determine the issue
> has actually been fixed?  We should probably put that in each bug at first,
> but as we go they should be gathered up into the wiki page.

That sounds very reasonable to me as well. Making it clear to developers
and reviewers why something is needed (and how to check it's fixed) will
be very helpful as we learn to watch out for the issues around this.

> There are some broad areas of need that might justify blueprints (I'm
> thinking of WAI-ARIA tagging, and making sure external UI widgets that we
> pull in are accessible).

That sounds already like a good item for the Review Checklist: things to
keep in mind when pulling in new Javascript libraries, since these tend
to happen independently of the requirements repository. I'm thinking of
a recent case where a JS library was later discovered not to be localised.

> Any suggestions on how to best share info, or organize bugs and blueprints
> are welcome!

The wiki page is great work already, with specific links to different
types of issues and why they're important. Definitely should be linked
from the review checklist (perhaps once we have better "foundations" for
accessibility?).

>From your understanding of the work to be done based on earlier
inspections of the code, do you think we should start with a largeish
blueprint that gets us to a reasonable-though-not-yet-perfect state, or
will this be workable as a series of independent bugs?

Either way it'd probably be nice to have an overall blueprint that links
to the different bugs so interested parties can track the work and know
where to help if they wish to.

I'm looking forward to the session! I'll be doing some reading before
that, thanks for linking again to that wiki page.

Julie

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReviewChecklist

> 
> Doug Fish
> IBM STG Cloud Solution Development
> T/L 553-6879, External Phone 507-253-6879
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>