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

RE: Iterative improvements?

From: Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 08:54:21 -0400
To: "Hoffman, Allen" <Allen.Hoffman@HQ.DHS.GOV>, "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5735ED0D92A3E6469F161EB41E7C28A81D5F84A736@MAILR001.mail.lan>
I agree about rendering, but the definition doesn't use the word render - it says "Information and sensory experience to be communicated to the user". Information that is written on a bit of hardware is "communicated to" me as soon as I look at it and start to read.

When you say "except as driven by software" are you not strengthening the argument that this is the word that we should use? I cannot see that software can be wrong - according to WCAG and to what you say. ICT is really wrong as it definitely includes hardware.

In M376 we will need to clearly draw the distinction between hardware and software, in response to comments - so I think that we will be forced to change the language that we originally used and that WCAG2ICT originally adopted.

Best regards

Mike

From: Hoffman, Allen [mailto:Allen.Hoffman@HQ.DHS.GOV]
Sent: 24 September 2012 13:20
To: Michael Pluke; public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org
Subject: RE: Iterative improvements?

Hardware does not render content, except as driven by software, either read-only "firmware", or modifiable software.  I don't quite see why we would change this to aim towards software?


From: Michael Pluke [mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com]<mailto:[mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com]>
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 8:13 PM
To: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org<mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Subject: Iterative improvements?

During that last WCAG2ICT call we agreed (re-confirmed) a definition of content as:

"Information and sensory experience to be communicated to the user by means of ICT, including any structure, presentation, and interaction.  (plus notes)"

This definition with "by means of ICT" originated from the M376 draft standard.

I now realise that this definition does not differentiate between content communicated by hardware (e.g. labels on physical controls) and non-embedded content (e.g. electronic documents) and software. As hardware is out of scope of WCAG2ICT this is not a major problem - but hardware is within the scope of M376 and Section 508.

I propose that we in WCAG2ICT use the replacement text:

"Information and sensory experience to be communicated to the user by means of software, including any structure, presentation, and interaction.  (plus notes)"

This should work for all content, embedded or not. Embedded content is, by definition, in software and must therefore be communicated by means of software. Non-embedded software needs a user agent to do the communicating to users. But WCAG clearly states that a user agent is software (did we really think it was something else!), so I think that substituting "software" for "ICT" works for all electronic content and avoids any confusion with content communicated by hardware.

Hopefully this small but important change is non-controversial. Do we need to survey?

Best regards

Mike
Received on Monday, 24 September 2012 12:54:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 24 September 2012 12:54:57 GMT