Tools List - presentation of ACT

[nitedog]

I strongly urge the group to consider making the availability of ACT reports more prominent. This can be a subtle icon or other way of distinguishing entries with ACT reports. One of the most fundamental issues of evaluation tools, and of accessibility more broadly, is the differences in interpreting the technical standard. This continues to cause confusion and distrust, and ACT is one important aspect to help address this issue. It seems important for EOWG to help promote ACT more strongly, to contribute to quicker uptake in the community.

[iadawn]

My personal thoughts. I reserve the right to be wrong :)

I am not sure that promoting ACT rules in the listing will have the desired effect. The list is really for people to find tools that are going to help them evaluate accessibility. I don't know how ACT rules will support people doing that as it requires quite a bit of knowledge about the rules to understand what the tool can and cannot help with. My worry is that this lack of understanding and a necessarily simplified presentation of ACT rule compliance will just confuse most people.

[nitedog]

I think you might be vastly under-estimating the wide scope of audiences who look for tools, and who look to compare their capabilities. I'm convinced that highlighting ACT on this list and continuously promoting it in other places will have strong impact over time, and it seems like a good opportunity to apply EOWG's mission.

[shawna-slh]

Previous EOWG discussions:

• 10 June 2022 Topic "Survey Results - Evaluation Tools List" is mostly about ACT Rules and includes:
  • There was concern about including ACT Rules info at all. e.g.: "I don't think that this is sufficiently well adopted as yet to say that it should be included. It is difficult to see how much value it would be to the broader community. As it becomes more widely adopted and the value is realized within the community then it can be incorporated."
  • "consensus is that the ACT Rules are not included as a filter."
    • — although a filter was pushed back in (not sure if EOWG agreed to that)
  • "to [summarize]: put the link to the detailed report for the tool into the details section for the tool and add nothing else"
    • — although I think numbers has since been pushed in (not sure if EOWG agreed to that)
• 21 Oct 2022

[nitedog]

Thank you for these pointers, Shawn! I agree that it might be too early for filters given the current still early days of ACT. However, the fact that ACT rules are currently less widely adopted is exactly the point and something that EOWG can/should actively support in my view. My proposal is subtle highlighting of entries with ACT information, to get people curious about ACT and encourage tool vendors to provide such information. It's a simple mechanism that doesn't cause friction to users yet helps to promote ACT within the intended community.

[WilcoFiers]

Thanks for bringing this up Shadi. I fully agree with you. I'm glad ACT is in the list, but not so much that the filter is at the bottom, and the information is hidden behind a "show more details" button.

Deciding how prominent to put this information tells people how important W3C thinks this is. Putting ACT Implementation at the bottom is effectively saying that it's the last thing to consider when looking at different tools to use in your process.

I don't think this work deserves to be the last thing in the hidden section. But I'm super biased. I've spent a decade on ACT.