W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag-teamc@w3.org > October 2005

Re: Draft of guide doc for GL 2.5 L2 SC 1 (UPDATED based on comments received last week)

From: Andi Snow-Weaver <andisnow@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 15:24:06 -0500
To: public-wcag-teamc@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFAAB9519B.B48C63AB-ON8625708F.006BB84A-8625708F.00701209@us.ibm.com>

Here's an update based on comments received last week. [1]

I'm not sure what to do about Christophe's comment. Clearly the working
group assumed a display, a keyboard or keypad, and optional audio when
writing the guidelines. We can propose that the success criterion be
modified as Christophe suggests: use "the same modality that is used for
labels, prompts and other guidance in the form/interaction" instead of
"text". But it makes it even more abstract and difficult to understand.

Doesn't text still apply even for VoiceXML applications? If a developer
uses "text" messages, they can be delivered in either synthesized speech or
as actual text for deaf users. If the developer provides the messages in
recorded audio, then he or she would need to provide a text alternative for
deaf users.

Looking at the techniques proposed from the Technique harvest,  this one
seems to belong under GL 3.1:

- Writing understandable 401 or 404 pages

And I'm not sure what to do with this one:

- Provide a guess when desired page is not found "smart 404"

(See attached file: Guide to Guideline 2_5 Level 2 Success Criterion 1.htm)

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/teamc-2/results

Andi


Received on Monday, 3 October 2005 20:24:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:47 GMT