W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-atag2-comments@w3.org > June 2012

Individual comments on ATAG 2.0

From: Gottfried Zimmermann \(List\) <zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 21:52:09 +0200
To: <public-atag2-comments@w3.org>
Cc: "'cooper'" <cooper@w3.org>, "'Janina Sajka'" <janina@rednote.net>
Message-ID: <01dc01cd40f9$33427480$99c75d80$@accesstechnologiesgroup.com>
Thank you for preparing this draft.  

Here are my individual comments on the ATAG 2.0 draft at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-ATAG20-20120410/: 

(1) "more accessible..."

Problem: In the document, it is stated several times that these guidelines
will make authoring tools "more accessible", but without giving a reference
point. The reader is left with the question "more accessible than what?".
Probably, the authors don't want to claim that the guidelines make authoring
tools FULLY accessible, and this is understandable.  
Proposed modification: "increase accessibility of ..." rather than "more
accessible".

(2) A.3.5.1 Text Search

Quote: "(b) Match: Matching results can be made visible to authors and given
focus".
Problem: The words "made visible" should be changed to "presented", in order
not to give the impression that the presentation of search results should be
presented in visual form only.

(3) Guideline A.3.7

Quote: "Guideline A.3.7: (For the authoring tool user interface) Ensure that
previews are at least as accessible as in-market user agents."
Problem: The word "in-market" is not defined which makes this guideline
rather fuzzy and hard to test.
Proposed modification: Add a glossary entry for "in-market user agents".

(4) B.2.2.1 Accessible Option Prominence (WCAG)

Quote: If authors are provided with a choice of authoring actions for
achieving the same authoring outcome (e.g., styling text), then options that
will result in accessible web content (WCAG) are at least as prominent as
options that will not."
Problem: What's missing here is that the authoring tool should clearly mark
the accessible options vs. the inaccessible options.  Cf. Guideline B.2.4.2,
where this requirement is included for templates: "B.2.4.2 Identify Template
Accessibility (Minimum): If the authoring tool includes a template selection
mechanism and provides any non-accessible template (WCAG) options, then the
templates are provided such that the template selection mechanism can
display distinctions between the accessible and non-accessible options."
Proposed modification: Add to B.2.2.1: "... and the options are provided
such that the option selection mechanism can display distinctions between
the accessible and non-accessible options."

(5) B.2.4.1 Accessible Template Options (WCAG)

Quote: "If the authoring tool provides templates, then there are accessible
template (WCAG) options for a range of template uses."
Problem: "range" is defined as: "More than one item within a multi-item
set."
One template only is too few as a requirement. There should be at least one
accessible template for every use case.
Proposed modification: "If the authoring tool provides templates, then there
are accessible template (WCAG) options for every use case."

(6) B.4.2.1 Model Practice (WCAG)

Quote: "A range of examples in the documentation (e.g., markup, screen shots
of WYSIWYG editing-views) demonstrate accessible authoring practices
(WCAG)."
Problem: "range" is too weak.
Proposed modification: "For every use case, at least one example in the
documentation (e.g., markup, screen shots of WYSIWYG editing-views)
demonstrates accessible authoring practices (WCAG)."

General note: The European Mandate 376 is currently developing accessibility
guidelines for public procurement in Europe.  In the current draft of the
resulting standard, ETSI EN 301 549, a separate subsection on authoring
tools is included. However, no reference to ATAG 2.0 is made (in contrast to
WCAG 2.0 which is frequently referenced).  It would be good to have EN 301
549 point to ATAG 2.0, rather than creating its own guidelines.  But it may
be already too late.

Best regards,
Gottfried Zimmermann

___________________________________________________

 Prof. Dr. Gottfried Zimmermann
 Access Technologies Group, Germany
___________________________________________________
Received on Saturday, 2 June 2012 19:52:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 2 June 2012 19:52:42 GMT