W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag-teama@w3.org > September 2005

Re: Action Items (find definition for focus, clarify change of context)

From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:32:54 +0100
Message-ID: <e2a28a920509271032a60271f@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ben Caldwell <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: public-wcag-teama@w3.org

Thanks for the comments, Ben.

> [BBC] Webster includes the following definition that I think is
> representative of how wer're using the term:
>
> 5 a : a center of activity, attraction, or attention  b : a point of
> concentration
>
> So, we could define focus as, "a point of user agent concentration or
> activity." I wonder if we need to define "focus" at all though. In
> reviewing open issues, this did not seem to be a point of confusion.
> Thoughts?

On reflection, I think I got carried away defining key terms and
concepts, and agree that focus probably doesn't need defining. If we
did define focus, I think that "a point of user agent concentration or
activity" could be a bit ambiguous, as there could be activity that
doesn't have focus in the sense of this success criteria.

> [BBC] I think the clarification about change in content vs. change of
> context was meant for the intent section of this guide doc draft. It
> came from Gregg's note on the old level 1 SC1:
>
> <blockquote
> cite="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-teama/2005Sep/0031">
>
> Change of context should not be confused with change of content. Small
> changes in content, such as an expanding outline, do not change the
> context and therefore, are not covered by this particular success criterion.
>
> </blockquote>
>
> If I remember correctly, David's suggestion was to also mention
> expanding/hover menus such that it would be clear to a reader that these
> (small) changes of content would not be considered changes of context.

So could we just amend Gregg's initial comment to incorporate David's
suggestion:

"A change of context should not be confused with change of content.
Small changes in content, such as an expanding outline or dynamic
menu, do not change the context and are therefore not covered by this
particular success criterion."

This would be appropriate for all of the guide docs, so should it be
included as a final paragraph at the end of the intent section for all
of the guide docs for clarity?

> > "A change of user agent, viewport, or focus; or a change of content
> > that changes the meaning of the original document."
>
> [BBC] I think this is a great suggestion. It seems to solve the problems
> we've identified with both "complete" and the previously proposed "main."
>
> Only suggestion woudl be to replace "original document" with "delivery
> unit."

I agree; delivery unit is more appropriate than original document.

Best regards,

Gez

--
_____________________________
Supplement your vitamins
http://juicystudio.com
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:33:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:54:12 UTC