Re: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Working Draft of December, 2007

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Masahiro Hori
<horim@res.kutc.kansai-u.ac.jp> wrote:



> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Comment 8: descriptive titles (SC 2.4.2)
> > Source:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2008Feb/0076.html
> > (Issue ID: 2527)
> > Status: VERIFIED / NOT ACCEPTED
> > ----------------------------
> > Original Comment:
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > This criterion requires that page titles should be descriptive so that
> > users can more quickly identify the content they need. This is an
> > issue relevant to ease of understanding rather than operation.
> >
> > Proposed Change:
> > Add a guideline for understandable navigation (e.g., Provide
> > descriptive titles, labels, and headings to help users find content)
> > in Principle 3, and move SC 2.4.2 under the new guideline.
> >
> > See also the same proposal for SC 2.4.4, 2.4.6, and 2.4.10.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > Response from Working Group:
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >
> > We used to have "navigation" as a principle, but found there was too
> > much overlap with the "operable" and "understanding" principles.
> >
> >
>
>  Navigation is the process of moving and/or guiding users' focus
>  from one place to another via landmarks.  Initially, I assumed
>  that hyperlinks are the only landmarks.  I'm afraid this view
>  has been hindered comprehensive understanding of success
>  criteria 2.4.2, 2.4.4, 2.4.6, and 2.4.10.
>
>  However, if landmarks include not only hyperlinks but also page
>  title, headings, labels, and section headings; that clarifies
>  the idea behind those criteria.  If this is correct understanding,
>  it would be helpful to make explicit that assumption, and put
>  the following statement into the glossary.
>
>  Navigation:
>   the process of moving and/or guiding users' focus from one place
>   to another via landmarks.  Landmarks include hyperlinks, focus
>   elements, page titles, headings, labels, and section headings.
>
>
>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Comment 9: purpose of each link (SC 2.4.4)
> > Source:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2008Feb/0077.html
> > (Issue ID: 2528)
> > Status: VERIFIED / NOT ACCEPTED
> > ----------------------------
> > Original Comment:
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > If this criterion is not met, additional keystrokes may be needed for
> > assistive technology users. However, note here that the way to remedy
> > that situation is not by improving ease of typing or operation but by
> > making link text more understandable. In this sense, SC 2.4.4 is
> > concerned with the understandability of link text rather than the ease
> > of operation or physical interaction with link text.
> >
> > Proposed Change:
> > Add a guideline for understandable navigation (e.g., Provide
> > descriptive titles, labels, and headings to help users find content)
> > in Principle 3, and move SC 2.4.4 under the new guideline.
> >
> > See also the same proposal for SC 2.4.2, 2.4.6, and 2.4.10.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > Response from Working Group:
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >
> > We used to have "navigation" as a principle, but found there was too
> > much overlap with the "operable" and "understanding" principles.
> >
> >
>
>  My reply is the same as the one made for Comment 8 (Issue ID: 2527).
>
>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Comment 10: descriptive labels (SC 2.4.6)
> > Source:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2008Feb/0078.html
> > (Issue ID: 2529)
> > Status: VERIFIED / NOT ACCEPTED
> > ----------------------------
> > Original Comment:
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > According to the statement "The intent of this Success Criterion is to
> > help users understand what information is contained ...", this
> > criterion is concerned with the understandability of link text rather
> > than the ease of operation in itself.
> >
> > Proposed Change:
> > Add a guideline for understandable navigation (e.g., Provide
> > descriptive titles, labels, and headings to help users find content)
> > in Principle 3, and move SC 2.4.6 under the new guideline.
> >
> > See also the same proposal for SC 2.4.2, 2.4.4, and 2.4.10.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > Response from Working Group:
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >
> > We used to have "navigation" as a principle, but found there was too
> > much overlap with the "operable" and "understanding" principles.
> >
> >
>
>  My reply is the same as the one made for Comment 8 (Issue ID: 2527).
>
>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Comment 11: section headings (SC 2.4.10)
> > Source:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2008Feb/0079.html
> > (Issue ID: 2530)
> > Status: VERIFIED / NOT ACCEPTED
> > ----------------------------
> > Original Comment:
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > Since this criterion primarily concerns with meaningful or semantic
> > organization of the content rather than syntactic organization, the
> > main issue related to this criterion is on the understandability of
> > section headings.
> >
> > It is stated that "but visual presentation is not sufficient to
> > identify document sections", which indicates SC 2.4.10 focuses on an
> > issue that cannot be resolved with regard to perceivability.
> >
> > In addition, according to the second note in SC 2.4.10, namely, "Note:
> > This Success Criterion covers sections within writing, not user
> > interface components", this criterion does not intend to focus on an
> > aspect of physical interaction.
> >
> > Proposed Change:
> > Add a guideline for understandable navigation (e.g., Provide
> > descriptive titles, labels, and headings to help users find content)
> > in Principle 3, and move SC 2.4.10 under the new guideline.
> >
> > See also the same proposal for SC 2.4.2, 2.4.4, and 2.4.6.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > Response from Working Group:
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >
> > We used to have "navigation" as a principle, but found there was too
> > much overlap with the "operable" and "understanding" principles.
> >
> >
>
>  My reply is the same as the one made for Comment 8 (Issue ID: 2527).
>

---------------------------------------------
Response from Working Group:
---------------------------------------------

We only provide definitions for terms used in the normative success
criteria. However, we have added a description of the term to the
Understanding GL 2.4 document as follows:

As described in The Motive Web Design Glossary
(http://www.motive.co.nz/glossary/navigation.php), navigation has two
main functions:
    * to tell the user where they are
    * to enable the user to go somewhere else


Thanks again for the interest that you have taken in these guidelines.
Could we ask you to let us know whether or not you are satisfied with
this response by Wed, April 16?

Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact

On behalf of the WCAG Working Group

Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 17:24:24 UTC