FW: Action item re SC 1.3.2 and 1.3.4 (color at L1 and L2)

Gregg's proposal-- this relates to issues 1607 and 1608.

Let's consider this proposed wording on the call this morning, and check
if it has any impact on the techniques that we've drafted for this SC.

John

"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu 
Web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility 



-----Original Message-----
From: public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gregg
Vanderheiden
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 12:40 AM
To: John M Slatin; 'Yvette Hoitink'
Cc: lguarino@adobe.com; public-wcag-teamb@w3c.org
Subject: RE: Action item re SC 1.3.2 and 1.3.4 (color at L1 and L2)



To address my "action item" I propose the following

At Level 1 have 

 1.3.2  When information is conveyed by color, the color can be
programmatically determined or the information is also conveyed through
text. [How to meet 1.3.2]

At level 2 we have

1.3.4  Any information that is conveyed by color is visually evident
when color is not available. [How to meet 1.3.4]


This avoids the problem of using a visual means to satisfy both L1 and
L2 resulting in no way for people who are blind to be able to access the
information.  


I pass this to Team B since this is now your area. 


 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: John M Slatin [mailto:john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:32 PM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden; Yvette Hoitink
Cc: lguarino@adobe.com
Subject: Action item re SC 1.3.2 and 1.3.4 (color at L1 and L2)

Gregg and Yvette,

During the discussion of GL 1.3 on the 15 December call, Yvette
discovered a problem with our requirements about information conveyed
through color.

If I remember right, the problem was that it might be possible to
satisfy SC 1.3.4 by making information that is conveyed through color
"visually evident" without making it available in non-visual ways--
because that would also satisfy SC 1.3.2 (L1) without making either the
information or the color that conveys it programmatically  determined.

The two of you took an action item to try to come up with new wording.

Here's what it says in the minutes:
<blockquote>
ACTION:  Yvette and Gregg to
review 1.3.2 and 1.3.4 to address programmatically determined,
guaranteeing visual access at level 2 and making the working consistent.
</blockquote>

This is related to issues 1607 and 1608.

GL 1.3 is on the agenda for the 5 January call.  Is there any chance
that you can send proposed wording to Team B (we're doing GL 1.3) by
sometime on Monday 2 January?

Or just send it to me and I'll forward to Team B.

Thanks! Apologies for badgering you with work items.

John

"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
Web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility

Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2006 14:15:50 UTC