W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org > July 2012

Re: User Interface Context

From: Loïc Martínez Normand <loic@fi.upm.es>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 01:08:48 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJpUyz=58c8A-0nym1TNsLwRtQpaa2jvPq186FngEZ2d=aGWxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bailey@access-board.gov>
Cc: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "Hoffman, Allen" <Allen.Hoffman@hq.dhs.gov>, Andi Snow-Weaver <andisnow@us.ibm.com>, "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Dear Bruce, dear all,

Please let me tell you all that I'm really sorry of not having being able
to participate in today's debate. It has been an interesting "night
reading" for me. Gregg has made a very good work at explaining our approach
in the definition of "user interface context" so there is not much I can
add.

There is one thing that I think that I can provide some additional
information, and it is about the "product" concept. When we (Gregg, Mike
and I) agreed to use "product" it was the concept as defined in ISO 9000
"Quality management systems -- Fundamentals and vocabulary" (and as also
used in ISO/IEC 17000 "Conformity assessment -- Vocabulary and general
principles"

The definition is:

*product*: result of a process
[ISO 9000:2000, 3.4.2]

In ISO/IEC 17000 there is a note that explains that there are four types of
products:

*NOTE 1 Four generic product categories are noted in ISO 9000:2000:
services (e.g. transport); software (e.g. computer program, dictionary);
hardware (e.g. engine, mechanical part); processed materials (e.g.
lubricant). Many products comprise elements belonging to different generic
product categories. Whether the product is then called service, software,
hardware or processed material depends on the dominant element.*

So that means that we can have products (results of a process) that belong
to the category "software". And this makes perfect sense, as software is
the result of a software development process, isn't it?

And, in addition, this definition of product is unrelated to the fact of
whether or not it is a commercial product or an "in-house" product.

Best regards,
Loïc

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Bailey, Bruce <Bailey@access-board.gov>wrote:

> I think I am comfortable with:
> > User Interface Context == set of user interface elements and the
> presented information that can be accessed using only navigation commands
>
> I can also appreciate that "product" was meant as an example of a "set of
> User Interface Contexts" rather than as a definition.
>
> But that still leaves:
> > User Interface Context (by one author) == set of user interface elements
> and the presented information, within a product, that can be accessed using
> only navigation commands
>
> That if it is not circular, it is at least ambiguous without a definition
> of "product" (that does not use our new UIC term).  I am not clear why we
> need to define "User Interface Context (by one author)".  Where do we use
> that phrase?
>
>
>


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Loïc Martínez-Normand
DLSIIS. Facultad de Informática
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Campus de Montegancedo
28660 Boadilla del Monte
Madrid
---------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail: loic@fi.upm.es
tfno: +34 91 336 74 11
---------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 13 July 2012 04:38:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 13 July 2012 04:38:21 GMT