Re: PFWG Review for Mobile Web Application Best Practices ( LC-2413 LC-2414 LC-2416 LC-2415)

 Dear Michael Cooper ,

The Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group has reviewed the comments you
sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the Mobile Web Application
Best Practices published on 13 Jul 2010. Thank you for having taken the
time to review the document and to send us comments!

The Working Group's response to your comment is included below, and has
been implemented in the new version of the document available at:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/latest.

Please review it carefully and let us know by email at
public-bpwg-comments@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 14 September
2010 (if possible, simply tell us if you need more time). In case of
disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific solution for or a
path to a consensus with the Working Group. If such a consensus cannot be
achieved, you will be given the opportunity to raise a formal objection
which will then be reviewed by the Director during the transition of this
document to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation Track.

Thanks,

For the Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group,
Dominique Hazaël-Massieux
François Daoust
W3C Staff Contacts

 1. http://www.w3.org/mid/4C50A44D.3030102@w3.org
 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-mwabp-20100713/


=====

Your comment on 3.5.2 Minimize Perceived Latency:
> Comment 1
> 
> > 3.5.3 Design for Multiple Interaction Methods 3.5.3.1 What it means
> …
> >  • Focus Based: The browser focus "jumps" from link to link;
> 
> and
> 
> > 3.5.3.2 How to do it Focus Based: …
> > Focus area will jump automatically from one selectable element to
> > another (e.g. from link to link) without affecting usability even
> > when widely spaced.
> 
> Suggest changing "from link to link" to "from element to element."


Working Group Resolution (LC-2413):
The group partially agrees with the comment. The text in 3.5.3.1 has been
updated as suggested. However, the group decided to keep "e.g. from link to
link" in 3.5.3.2 on the grounds that it is a typical example of how such
mobile browsers behave on simple Web pages. See updated text in latest
editor's draft:

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/latest#bp-presentation-interaction

----

Your comment on 3.5.3 Design for Multiple Interaction Methods:
> Comment 2
> 
> Suggest adding a fourth type of interaction method to 3.5.3.1:
> 
> Assistive Technology Based: Events are controlled by a software
> application (e.g. screen reader or voice control application) acting on
> behalf of the user.


Working Group Resolution (LC-2414):
The group partially agrees with the comment. While it does not feel that a
fourth type of interaction method needs to be added to the list of the main
interaction methods so far, it acknowledges the importance of mentioning
other types of interaction methods - including assistive technology and
voice controlled applications - and updated the text consequently. The text
also emphasizes that new interaction methods may emerge and become
prevalent in the future. See updated text in the latest editor's draft:

http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/latest#bp-presentation-interaction

----

Your comment on 3.5.3 Design for Multiple Interaction Methods:
> Comment 4
> 
> Suggest adding a fourth type of interaction method to 3.5.3.2:
> 
> Assistive Technology Based:
> 
> • Follow recommendations outlined in the Web Content Accessibility
> Guidelines 2.0 [http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/]
> • For mobile web applications that allow creation of web content,
> follow
> recommendations outlined in the Authoring Tool Accessibility
> Guidelines
> 2.0 [http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG20/]
> • Once the spec reaches CR, follow recommendations outlined in
> Accessible Rich Internet Applications 1.0
> [http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/]
> • Elements should be operable through means outside the primary
> interaction method for each device. For example, on a device where the
> primary interaction model is touch-based, assistive technology
> software
> may operate using a focus-based interaction model even though there is
> no concept of focus in the primary interaction model.


Working Group Resolution (LC-2416):
Following the resolution of Comment 2 (LC-2414), the group partially
agrees with the comment and added a reference to Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines 2.0 as an example of available guidelines and best practices to
address other types of interaction methods. See updated text in latest
editor's draft:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/latest#bp-presentation-interaction

While the Mobile Web Application Best Practices specification encourages
tool developers to read the document, the main audience of the
specification is Web application developers. As such, the text does not
reference the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines.

----

Your comment on 3.5.3.2 How to do it:
> Comment 3
> 
> > 3.5.3.2 How to do it Touch Based: … Selectable elements must be
> large
> > enough to be easily selected (e.g. list items should have a height
> of
> > at least 30px);
> 
> Suggest using a physical size rather than a pixel size, as device
> resolutions and DPI scale can vary from device to device, or explain in
> better detail that this is not referring to physical screen pixels.
> Mobile devices today range from less than 72 dpi to greater than 300
> dpi.


Working Group Resolution (LC-2415):
The group agrees with the comment. The text was updated to mention "the
physical size of a fingertip". See updated in latest editor's draft:
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/Drafts/BestPractices-2.0/latest#bp-presentation-interaction

----

Received on Tuesday, 7 September 2010 14:21:04 UTC