W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > June 2007


From: Gian Sampson-Wild <gian@tkh.com.au>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:15:58 +1000
To: "'Loretta Guarino Reid'" <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Cc: <public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001601c7b78f$8fc27280$b300a8c0@tkhcomputer>

Comment 23:

Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/000901c69538$2e394450$f4c9b23a@tkhcomputer
(Issue ID: LC-1043)

Definition: "For all non-text content one of the following is true.if
non-text content is pure decoration, or used only for visual formatting, or
if it is not presented to users, it is implemented such that it can be
ignored by assistive technology".  What is the definition of assistive
technology?  If one assistive technology behaves one way and another
assistive technology another, then how should this SC be followed?

Proposed Change:

Redefine this SC

Response from Working Group:

Assistive technology is defined in the Glossary at
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#atdef .

Technology-specific techniques define sufficient mechanisms for marking
non-text content so that it will be ignored by AT. If there are differences
in behavior among different AT, these should be noted in the User Agent
notes for that technique.
Response from GSW:
I still believe that this brings up a serious testability concern. How can
this be tested? On which assistive technologies? On which versions? How do
you define "ignore" - only if the assistive technology ignores it on default
or if it is an option the user could choose? There is inconsistency between
screen readers reading alt="" - which is the most basic example of this
success criteria - so even this particular technique could be said not to
fully fulfill this checkpoint.
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 01:16:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:14:44 UTC