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

Re: examples of sets of documents

From: Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 23:15:55 -0700
Message-ID: <504ED71B.8090701@oracle.com>
To: Gregg Vanderheiden <ez1testing@gmail.com>
CC: Loïc Martínez Normand <loic@fi.upm.es>, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Gregg,

Comments in-line below:

On 9/10/2012 9:51 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
> Peter, Loic,
>
> You were having trouble seeing how these could meet the SC
>
> 1) these are on the web so the question is would they meet WCAG -- 
>  And the answer is yes.  Browsing  and searching.

PK: Neither browsing nor searching work JUST FROM THE TWO (pairs of) 
URLs YOU DISTRIBUTED TO US.  They might be on a website with either a 
search function and the ability to browse, but we didn't see that.  
Therefore, given what we had (e.g. a "web site" consisting of only two 
URLs), I still maintain that they as such didn't meet WCAG.

>
> 2) if they were NOT on the web - the question isn't whether they DO or 
> not but whether they easily could or not.

PK: I'm sorry, I misunderstood your reply.

> 2a) another question (ala Alan) is whether they could meet the SC 
>  WITHOUT having to open them up and re-edit them.
>
> The answer to  (2) and (2a) is yes for both.
>
>
> Walking this through.....
>
> Assuming you are distributing these in some fashion besides the web.
>
>   * If on the web then use WCAG directly.
>   * If a person downloads them from the web then -- all bets are off.
>      WCAG doesn’t cover that we we don't either.  It was on the web
>     and met WCAG.  If the user choses to pull it into another
>     environment -- then the author is not responsible any more than if
>     they broke them apart or printed them as image documents to their
>     drive or anything else.
>
>
> So - back to assuming you are distributing them in some way other than 
> the web.  You are distributing one of these sets on a flash drive or 
> dvd or zipped and mailed to someone or  on a file servers or in some 
> other non-web fashion.
>
> Since you are doing so, you would, should, (or at any rate - easily 
> can), give them a meaningful file name before you distribute them.
>
> This will allow you to meet SC 2.4.2. Page Title

PK: Note: that shouldn't be the ONLY way to meet SC 2.4.2.

>
> It also give you (or rather, you give the user) two simple methods 
> which would meet SC 2.4.5.
>
> 1) the user can browse to them in the Finder or Windows Explorer.
> 2) the user can use the search function in the Finder or Windows 
> Explorer.
>
> Both techniques are ways the user can use to find the documents.

PK: I still don't follow.  Let us say they have meaningful filenames, 
but neither document refers to the other.  Are you saying that, given a 
"modern" desktop OS that allows searching by filename and browsing 
contents of disks/directories, that SC 2.4.5 should essentially 
automatically be met?



> The directory method (#1 above) is a direct parallel with technique 
> */G63 "providing a site map"/* since the directory provides a listing 
> of all of the parts of the set.

PK: For this to be used by folks in meeting SC 2.4.5, I believe we need 
a NOTE or other text to direct folks to the non-web equivalent of 
"providing a site map".

>
> The search function (#2 above)  is a direct parallel with */G161 
> "Providing a search function to help users find content."/*

PK: Ditto here - this should be made clear in our guidance for non-web 
ICT software if we are to expect folks to use it.

>
> If the docs meets the other success criteria then these two approaches 
> would work and would do it.
> If the docs do not meet the other success criteria (e.g. they don't 
> have meaningful titles when you pass them around to others, or are not 
> text ) then they don't conform anyway.
>
> So you can easily meet this success criterion without editing the 
> document at all.
> And if you want to keep the document number (if it has meaning) you 
> can do that too.  (e.e.  "document name - 56013d01.pdf"

PK: Finally, making this essentially trivial to meet (meet SC 2.4.2 & 
exist on a modern desktop OS and you have automatically met SC 2.4.5) I 
think strips it of nearly all of its meaning and value.


Regards,

Peter

>
>
>
> Gregg
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2012, at 4:54 PM, Loïc Martínez Normand <loic@fi.upm.es 
> <mailto:loic@fi.upm.es>> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Thank you Gregg for providing these good examples of sets of 
>> documents, which I agree they are.
>>
>> But I'm with Peter about conforming to 2.4.5 (multiple ways). I don't 
>> think that there two examples meet 2.4.5 either as web content or as 
>> a set of documents once downloaded in one computer. I don't think 
>> that the techniques defined for 2.4.5 are applied in those two examples.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Loïc
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com 
>> <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Gregg,
>>
>>     I'm afraid I don't see how these example documents meet 2.4.5
>>     Multiple Ways - either using Proposal #9 at
>>     https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/home/2-operable/24-provide-ways-to-help-users-navigate-find-content-and-determine-where-they-are/245-multiple-ways
>>     or frankly just as web pages using WCAG 2.0.
>>
>>     In the Muse Test Suite example, the filenames are
>>     "MUSE_DTF4.1p_V07.pdf" and "MUSE_DTF4.2p_V05.pdf" (or perhaps
>>     "6BED1d01.pdf" and "57013d01.pdf" as that is what they get as
>>     temporary filenames when passed to my copy of Adobe Reader). 
>>     Neither of these are "Test Suite, Part 1: Test Objectives" or
>>     "Test Suite, Part 2: Test Methods" - so internal references to
>>     those filenames don't exist (so I don't see how that would be
>>     "one of the multiple ways").  This same situation arises with the
>>     Audacity example - the filesystem filenames don't match the
>>     document filenames ("Super-Fast Guide to Audio Editing" vs.
>>     "Audacity_Guide.pdf"   and "Editing Audio with Audacity (Part 2)"
>>     vs. "EditingAudioPart2.pdf").
>>
>>     Also, proposal #9 lacks the NOTE at the end of proposal #8, but
>>     even following that NOTE, since not all documents in both
>>     examples contain links to the other, the only "way" of the
>>     necessary at least 2 ways that I find is "searching the
>>     documents' contents").
>>
>>
>>     So... while I think these are good examples of a "set of
>>     documents" - at least for purposes of our discussion - I don't
>>     see them as examples of documents that pass our contemplated
>>     tests for 2.4.5 (let alone passing WCAG 2.4.5 when viewing them
>>     as web pages).
>>
>>
>>     Peter
>>
>>
>>     On 9/8/2012 2:52 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>>>     Hi Peter,
>>>
>>>     Currently they are web pages.  And the do meet WCAG as web pages.
>>>
>>>     I can't comment on their meeting WCAG in other contexts since
>>>     a) the other context is not described
>>>     b) the WCAG2ICT hasn’t said how WCAG would be applied to those
>>>     other contexts.
>>>
>>>     Given the discussions we have been having in WCAG2ICT though --
>>>     I would see no problem in the documents meeting what the
>>>     WCAG2ICT has been discussing, and doing so in most any context
>>>     that I can think of  (e.g. saved from an email, on a server, in
>>>     a folder together on a drive, of flash memory stick, etc.)
>>>      except if you split them up -- but we specifically exclude a
>>>     set that has been broken up from being still considered a set --
>>>     so I guess they would pass that too.
>>>
>>>
>>>     /Gregg/
>>>     --------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Sep 7, 2012, at 12:28 PM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com
>>>     <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>     Gregg,
>>>>
>>>>     Thanks for finding these examples!
>>>>
>>>>     Looking at the first set (Muse Test Suite), in your opinion
>>>>     should these pass or fail the SC?  In your reading of the draft
>>>>     SC language, do they pass or fail?  Any why?
>>>>
>>>>     Same questions for the second set (User Guide to Audio
>>>>     editing...)...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     On 9/6/2012 11:29 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>>>>>     here are two examples
>>>>>
>>>>>      1. Muse Test Suite, Part 1 Test Objectives (link
>>>>>         <http://www.ist-muse.org/Deliverables/TF4/MUSE_DTF4.1p_V07.pdf>)
>>>>>         & Part 2 Test Methods (link
>>>>>         <http://www.ist-muse.org/Deliverables/TF4/MUSE_DTF4.2p_V05.pdf>).
>>>>>
>>>>>           * Published together on Jan 6, 2006. Labeled as a set in
>>>>>             1.1 Scope.
>>>>>
>>>>>      2. User Guide to Audio editing with Audacity, Part 1 (link
>>>>>         <http://www.jtoolkit.com/audio/Audacity_Guide.pdf>) & Part
>>>>>         2 (link
>>>>>         <http://www.jtoolkit.com/audio/EditingAudioPart2.pdf>).
>>>>>           * Published together in 2009 and labeled as a set in Part 2.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     /Gregg/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     -- 
>>>>     <oracle_sig_logo.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/>
>>>>     Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
>>>>     Phone: +1 650 506 9522 <tel:+1%20650%20506%209522>
>>>>     Oracle Corporate Architecture Group
>>>>     500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
>>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>     Note: @sun.com <http://sun.com/> e-mail addresses no longer
>>>>     function; be sure to use: peter.korn@oracle.com
>>>>     <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com> to reach me
>>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>     <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>
>>>>     Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that
>>>>     help protect the environment
>>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     <oracle_sig_logo.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/>
>>     Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
>>     Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
>>     500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
>>
>>     <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>
>>     Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that
>>     help protect the environment
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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 <mailto:loic@fi.upm.es>
>> tfno: +34 91 336 74 11
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>

-- 
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to 
developing practices and products that help protect the environment
Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2012 06:18:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 September 2012 06:18:51 GMT