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

Re: New definition for "set of software"

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 11:00:18 -0600
To: "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org Force" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Message-id: <224755B8-386D-4D76-8A2A-BB08CC20B71D@trace.wisc.edu>
Great discussion of the new definition at the meeting today -  though it was not on the agenda so no decisions were made yet.  

Several changes were suggested to make definition language clearer

move the note about 'sets of software being rare' to first note position -- so that people who don't have sets realize that it is rare and that they may not have one
Add a note that says
 "If there is any ambiguity whether the group is a set, then the group is not a set. "
Add a note to make it clear that this provision does not REQUIRE things be made into sets (e.g. interlinking) , and that if something isn't a set, then it automatically satisfies the SC
Note 3: Any software that is not a set, per this definition, would automatically satisfy any success criterion that specified to apply to "sets of" software, (as is true for any success criterion that is scoped to only apply to some other type of content).
Make it clearer that each item in the set needs to link to each other item 
so
"...but that are interlinked bidirectionally with one another..."
was changed to 
"...but that are interlinked comprehensively each with every other one..."

There were no outstanding issues on the definition at the end of the discussion, but everyone will be reviewing and thinking more about it over the weekend and on Monday for consideration at the Tuesday meeting.  


The result is below and on the working site 
https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/remaining-3-scs


Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
 

NEW DEFINITION AND NOTES


set of software: (as used in WCAG2ICT)    {revised at WCAG2ICT meeting Nov 16 }

group of software programs that are distributed together and that can be launched and be used independently from each other, but that are interlinked comprehensively each with every other one such that users can easily move from one program to another via a link, control, or other means, without taking other actions.

Note 1:  This definition of "set of software" is derived from the characteristics of a "set" of web pages, and is used for mapping WCAG success criteria to software.  Although such sets occur frequently for web pages, such sets appear to be extremely rare for software.

Note 2:  If a member of the set is separated from the set, it is no longer part of a set, and would be evaluated as any other individual software program.

Note 3: Any software that is not a set, per this definition, would automatically satisfy any success criterion that specified to apply to "sets of" software, (as is true for any success criterion that is scoped to only apply to some other type of content).  

Note 4: If there is any ambiguity whether the group is a set, then the group is not a set. 

One example of a set of software would be a group of programs that can be launched and used separately but are sold together and all have a menu that allows users to launch, or switch to, each of the other programs in the group. 

Examples of things that are not sets of software:

A suite of applications for authoring different types of documents (text, spreadsheets, presentations, etc.) but that don't provide an explicit means to launch, or switch to, each of the other programs in the group. 
An open office package that launches as a single program that provides multiple functionality such as writing, spreadsheet, etc., but the only way to move between programs open a document in one of the programs.
A bundle of software is sold together but the only way to move between them is to use a system level menu to between programs (not a menu provided by each program that allows you to do just the other programs this set).
A group of programs that would have qualified as set except that they have been installed in separate locations so that their "set" behaviors no longer work. Even though they were set at one time, because they were not installed as a set they are no longer a set and would not need to meet any success criteria created for a set.
Any group of software that does not provide a way to move to the other members of the group from within each member of the group without causing some other action such as opening a document or file. 





On Nov 16, 2012, at 8:25 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu> wrote:

> 
>  a new definition for "Set of software" has been created that gives us a chance to close the remaining 3 SC.  
> 
> it is below and also at https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/remaining-3-scs
> 
> The definition addresses all of the problems we had identified with previous definitions.
> 
> It is objective
> 	- every question about 'is this a set' that was raised so far was answerable from the definition
> it doesn’t include any 'accidental sets'
> 	- bundling software will never create a set under this
> 	- the fact that clicking on something opens up another application - is specifically excluded by the definition from making them related
> - etc
> 
> Take a look
> 
> if you see any problems -- post them back.
> 
> thanks 	
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Gregg
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> Director Trace R&D Center
> Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
> and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
> Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info
> Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org
> and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project -  http://GPII.net
> 
Received on Friday, 16 November 2012 17:00:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 16 November 2012 17:00:55 GMT