RE: Recently discovered issue with WCAG2ICT definition of "document" - suggesting a new note to clarify

Fine with me.

 

Cheers

David MacDonald

 

CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

  Adapting the web to all users

            Including those with disabilities

 <http://www.can-adapt.com/> www.Can-Adapt.com

 

From: Alex Li [mailto:alli@microsoft.com] 
Sent: July-03-13 7:34 PM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden; Peter Korn
Cc: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org Force
Subject: RE: Recently discovered issue with WCAG2ICT definition of
"document" - suggesting a new note to clarify

 

I concur. -Alex

 

From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 4:31 PM
To: Peter Korn
Cc: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org Force
Subject: Re: Recently discovered issue with WCAG2ICT definition of
"document" - suggesting a new note to clarify

 

I think it is a good note, and important.   And in keeping with our other
advice.   

 

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

 

On Jul 3, 2013, at 5:58 PM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com> wrote:

 

Hi gang,

As part of a wider review of WCAG2ICT (asking colleagues who aren't on the
Task Force to look at it), I just discovered an issue with the definition of
"document <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wcag2ict/#keyterms_document> ".  The
issue is that readers will see the term "document" and think "file", and
therefore try to apply WCAG requirements to all manner of files (virus
definition files and programming files were two specific concerns that came
up from colleagues).

While our definition of "document" is based on the term "content
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wcag2ict/#keyterms_content> " (which is scoped to
"information and sensory experience to be communicated to the user"), I fear
this fact is too easily missed.  Therefore, I propose that we add an
additional Note to clarify this: 

Note: Software configuration and storage files such as databases and virus
definitions, as well as computer instruction files such as source code,
batch/script files, and firmware, are not examples of documents.  Such files
are not "information and sensory experience to be communicated to the user"
and therefore are not considered content.

I have added that note in context, as proposed "(New) Note 3" in red text as
part of the full definition of document, below:

document (as used in WCAG2ICT)

assembly of content <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wcag2ict/#keyterms_content> ,
such as a file, set of files, or streamed media that is not part of software
and that does not include its own user agent

Note 1: A documents always requires a user agent to present its content to
the user.

Note 2: Letters, spreadsheets, emails, books, pictures, presentations, and
movies are examples of documents.

(New) Note 3: Software configuration and storage files such as databases and
virus definitions, as well as computer instruction files such as source
code, batch/script files, and firmware, are not examples of documents.  Such
files are not "information and sensory experience to be communicated to the
user" and therefore are not considered content.

Note 34: Anything that can present its own content without involving a user
agent, such as a self playing book, is not a document but is software.

Note 45: A single document may be composed of multiple files such as the
video content, closed caption text, etc. This fact is not usually apparent
to the end-user consuming the document / content. This is similar to how a
single web page can be composed of content from multiple URIs (e.g. the page
text, images, the JavaScript, a CSS file etc.).



I would like to propose this edit as part of the WCAG WG review next Tuesday
July 9th, so it can get into the 3rd/final public draft that we publish
later in July.  

Any thoughts/edits before I do this as part of my WCAG WG
<https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Ultimate/> "Ultimate? Survey"
response?


Peter

-- 
 <http://www.oracle.com/> <oracle_sig_logo.gif>
Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>  
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064 
 <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> Oracle is
committed to developing practices and products that help protect the
environment