- From: Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:34:08 -0700
- To: Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
- CC: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <51AF7690.80105@oracle.com>
Mike, Gregg, I have some trouble by the "services ... used by ... non-Web documents", as that confers a level of agency that I don't see present in /non-software /documents. A DAISY book doesn't use the accessibility services in the DAISY reader. The DAISY reader extracts & displays the captions from the DAISY file. There is no code in a DAISY file. The captions are encoded in DAISY; they are extracted by the user agent (the DAISY player). An HTML5 player, complete with Javascript & perhaps other code, is software. Gregg - you write below: /A user agent is already "platform software" so we can't say "other platform software or user agents" / Where do we say this? We define user agent <http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/#keyterms_ua> as "any software that retrieves and presents documents for users". So a user agent is software. But not all software is a platform. Some user agents are platforms, but not all. Notepad is a user agent (by our definition). How is it a platform? Peter On 6/5/2013 10:05 AM, Michael Pluke wrote: > > I think that I could live with your suggestion of: > > -services provided by an operating system, user agent, or other > platform software that are used by software or non-web documents to > expose information about the user interface and events to assistive > technologies. > > It doesn't entirely avoid the issue of whether documents can actually > do things like "using" something, but I think that the meaning of the > above is definitely clear enough for me. > > Best regards > > Mike > > *From:*Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] > *Sent:* 05 June 2013 17:21 > *To:* Michael Pluke > *Cc:* Peter Korn; public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org > *Subject:* Re: Two variants for the redefinition of "accessibility > services of software" > > hmmm > > I see where you are going -- and I kind of like it but I'm not sure > what the SOFTWARE is that is right after "used by" > > What software is that? the user agent? then the user agent is > providing the service to itself? > > I think the user agent provides the service to the non-web document. > > - for example - a daisy book (epub 3 book now) uses the > accessibility services in the epub player to expose its captions (for > captioned material) etc, and uses the Operating System accessibility > services to have the book read aloud. (or actually the ebook may > use the epub reader/player for everything and the epub reader may (or > may not) make use of accessibility services in the OS (may not - > because they may decide to do it all themselves). > > in any case, the ebook (a non-web document) is using the > accessibility services of the reader (a user agent) > > the language for this would then be > > -services provided by an operating system or other platform > software including user agents that are used by software or > non-web documents to expose information about the user interface > and events to assistive technologies > > or perhaps easier to read > > *-****services provided by an operating system, user agent, or > other platform software that are used by software or non-web > documents to expose information about the user interface and > events to assistive technologies* > > ** > > A user agent is already "platform software" so we can't say > "other platform software or user agents" . That is like saying > or other engineer or electrical engineer. > > Make sense? > > /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 Jun 5, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Michael Pluke > <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com <mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>> > wrote: > > > > Would the following, slightly more verbose, wording work for everyone? > > -services provided by an operating system, other platform software, or > a user agent that are used by software to expose information about the > user interface and events, of software or non-web documents, to > assistive technologies > > It is a little cumbersome and Peter might argue that the "of software > or non-web documents" is not needed -- but it does at least address > that software is the thing that uses services. > > Mike > > *From:*Peter Korn [mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com <http://oracle.com>] > *Sent:*05 June 2013 16:58 > *To:*Gregg Vanderheiden > *Cc:*Michael Pluke;public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org > <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org> > *Subject:*Re: Two variants for the redefinition of "accessibility > services of software" > > Gregg, > > Let me try this another way: > > Software contains at least logic statements - things like "if-then". > Software processes input, generates output. In contrast, markup (like > HTML, which some people call "code" but I would simply say "is an > encoding") doesn't contain such logic. It doesn't actually process > input. It isn't the thing that/generates/the output (it may/be/the > output, but that is different). > > So: if something is software - e.g. Javascript in a web application - > then it is software. It is covered by the existing text. If > something is NOT software - e.g. a static web page - then it is/only/a > document (with whatever markup), and so it is/only/the user agent that > is taking advantage of "accessibility services" or "other software APIs". > > Make sense? > > > Also, I disagree with your statement below. /All/software does in fact > make use of some form of platform services. Even software that only > calculates the Fibonacci series and prints the result or writes it to > a file. It is using/some/platform service to print the result, to > open/write to the file. In fact,/even software that does no i/o/is > using some platform service/just to be loaded into memory/. Many > kinds of software don't have a visual UI (daemon services for > example), and so aren't covered by WCAG2ICT and don't have any reason > to use platform accessibility services. But they all use some kind of > platform non-accessibility service. > > > As to "pure HTML/markup" documents that have form fields: again, there > is no/logic/there. The user agent does the logic. The user agent > notices the click (or <ENTER>) on the "submit" button, etc. If you > really want to push things and say that the markup contains/some/logic > (mapping the submit button to a particular new URL so that the > "if-then" of "if click then go to page" logic is in the markup), I'll > grant you an edge case. But again, there is so little logic there, > and the HTML isn't/actively/utilizing any accessibility APIs, etc. I > find this a much cleaner distinction to make. > > Note by the way, we had/this same/problem/discussion in TEITAC. > > > Peter > > On 6/5/2013 8:31 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: > > Hi Peter > > Not ALL non-web documents do (and not ALL Software makes use of > platform services). But since SOME do , it needs to be in the > definition - No? . > > If you want to put SOME in front of non-web documents and MOST > in front of software that is fine. But not necessary. > > Actually don't most ALL non-web documents that have user interface > components in them expose them through user agent services? > Doesn't all AT access the content via the user agent ? (or can > they access content on non-web documents that are not opened in a > user agent?) > > /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 Jun 5, 2013, at 11:26 AM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com > <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>> wrote: > > > > > Wading in... > > While I see many (though not all) user agents as being platforms > (hence Note 1 in platform software), I don't see all (or even > most) documents as utilizing "a set of software services". Since > software services are APIs, and it is programming code that > invokes APIs, documents that don't contain programming code (e.g. > a simple text document) by definition cannot use those APIs, and > so by definition don't use software services. > > Recall the WCAG2ICT definition ofuser agent > <http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/#keyterms_ua>- it is the thing that > "retrieves and presents documents". That thing clearly parses the > documents - gets whatever markup is in them, etc. - and then > utilizes the accessibility services of the platform underneath > it. Where that user agent is also a platform (Adobe Flash, > Microsoft Silverlight, a web browser running Javascript code, a > Java runtime), it also is a platform. But Notepad and Wordpad > aren't platforms. They are, however, by our definition, user agents. > > > Make sense? > > > Given that, I would not insert the text "non-Web documents" as > Gregg is proposing. > > > Peter > > On 6/5/2013 7:50 AM, Michael Pluke wrote: > > I guess conceptually from a WCAG point of view that is the case. > > It seems that I have a persistent problem seeing how lines of > code in document (e.g. Web page, word doc) can,*in reality*, > do anything like "expose information". To me it is clear that > it is the user agent that takes the web page/document and > "exposes information about the user interface (as encoded in > the page/document) to assistive technologies." Although > conceptually the user agent may offer its services to the > document, I still struggle to see what a document, or anything > else that is not software, can*do*with this offer. Surely only > software can actually*do*things -- and that is why all > documents need a user agent*to do things*. > > But I guess I will have to learn to live with this conceptual > myopia (if that is what it is) -- as long as everyone else is > comfortable with what you have written. Certainly your text is > simple and clear. > > I would still prefer to see the notes in their original order. > > Best regards > > Mike > > *From:*Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] > *Sent:*05 June 2013 15:14 > *To:*Michael Pluke > *Cc:*Peter Korn;public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org > <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org> > *Subject:*Re: Two variants for the redefinition of > "accessibility services of software" > > On Jun 5, 2013, at 10:07 AM, Michael Pluke > <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com > <mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>> wrote: > > > > > > I'm not so certain whether this addition is needed. In my mind > it is always software that actually uses the services that the > platform provides. In the case of non-web documents I see it > as being the user agent that uses the services to "expose > information about the user interface to assistive > technologies". So I do not see that it is necessary to add > non-web documents to the first definition. For the second it > is more complex as I see the user agent using the services to > expose information about the user interface of both the user > agent AND the document to assistive technologies. In this case > it might be OK to stick with Peter's original wording or it > might be necessary to craft something much more complex. > > Did you not see that USER AGENT is an example of platform? > > All browsers are platforms. > > > > > > I realise that I am far less experienced at interpreting the > underlying WCAG 2.0 model of content and user agents, so I > accept that my interpretation may be wrong -- but I think that > expert eyes need to look again at Peter's original definitions > and Gregg's amendments. > > In either case I do not think that reversing the notes as > Gregg has done adds clarity to the original (it either has no > effect or, in my view, makes it marginally less good). > > In constructing the survey I will point to the place where > Peter has written the original proposals. If we can resolve > some alternative text before the survey is sent out, then this > text needs to be changed (preferably by Peter or Gregg who are > adept with editing the wiki). > > Best regards > > Mike > > *From:*Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu > <http://trace.wisc.edu/>] > *Sent:*05 June 2013 04:27 > *To:*Peter Korn > *Cc:*public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org> > *Subject:*Re: Two variants for the redefinition of > "accessibility services of software" > > very nice > > only one thing I think needs to be fixed. > > You discuss user agents as an example but don't have non-web > documents anywhere in either. > > also > > Below are the same text with NON WEB DOCUMENTS in the correct > places > > Because both notes contain User agents and virtual machines -- > I think it reads better to reverse them (as shown below) (I > didn't fix the note numbering so you can see the switch) > > Very nice > > gregg > > > platform software > > The term *platform software*, as used in WCAG2ICT, has the > meaning below: > > *platform software* > > collection of software components that run on an underlying > software or hardware layer, and that provides a set of > software services to applications OR NON-WEB DOCUMENTS that > allow them to be isolated from the underlying software or > hardware layer > > *Note 2:* Sometimes platform software is also a software > application (e.g. a user agent or a virtual machine). > > *Note 1: *Examples of platform software include operating > systems, user agents, and virtual machines. > > > accessibility services of platform software > > The term *accessibility services of platform software*, as > used in WCAG2ICT, has the meaning below: > > *accessibility services of platform software* > > services provided by *platform software *that are used by > software OR NON-WEB DOCUMENTS to expose information about the > user interface to assistive technologies > > *Note 1: *These services are commonly provided in the form of > accessibility APIs (application programming interfaces), and > they provide two-way communication with assistive > technologies, including exposing information about objects and > events. > > *Note 2:**Platform software* that is also an application may > simply expose the accessibility services of the underlying > platform layer, rather expose its own set of accessibility > services. Alternately it may translate between the set it > exposes and those of the underlying platform layer. > > /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 > <http://cloud4all.info/> > Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - > http://Raisingthefloor.org <http://raisingthefloor.org/> > and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project - > http://GPII.net <http://gpii.net/> > > On Jun 4, 2013, at 8:46 PM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com > <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi gang, > > Coming out of our last meeting on 31June13, I have taken a > whack at redefining "accessibility services of software" to > make more central the concept that this is about/platform > software/, and not all software generally. > > Please seeProposal #3 at New glossary term "accessibility > services of software and assistive technology" > <https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/edits-for-michael-post-2nd-public-draft/new-glossary-term-accessibility-services-of-software-and-assistive-technology> > > In particular, please see both***/Variant #3a/*in which I keep > our existing definition text, but simply change the title of > the term to "*accessibility services of platform software*"; > and then see*/Variant #3b/*in which I introduce yet another > new term: "*platform software*", when I then leverage in next > text for the retitled term "*accessibility services of > platform software*". > > Fundamentally*/Variant #3a/*is the more minimal / less > invasive change, while*/Variant #3b/*makes fuller use of the > "teachable moment" that our Technical Report affords us. > Please also note the section*For reference, from ISO > 13066-1*at the bottom of that wiki page, from which I draw on > (but do not expressly mimic) that ISO text. While it is > somewhat tempting to lift definitions word for word from ISO > 13066-1, those definitions leverage terms & concentps that > have slightly different existing definitions in WCAG 2.0 (e.g. > AT), and I am also unclear on whether such copying is of a > copyright ISO standard is OK in a non-ISO document such as our TR. > > Below both variants on the wiki page please see*"Edits to > other terms common to both Variants #3a and #3b"*where I show > show how the new term "accessibility services of platform > software" would impact our two glossary terms > "programmatically set" and "programmatically determined", as > well as Principal 4 and Guideline 4.1 (the change is the same > under both variants). > > > I personally don't have a strong preference between*/Variant > #3a/*and*/Variant #3b/*- different things attract me to each > of them. I solicit comments / feedback on them, ahead of a > formal survey (perhaps tomorrow?) ahead of our Friday > meeting. I suggest we survey both approaches (as well as the > follow-on edits to those two terms, the principal, and the > guideline). > > > > Peter > > -- > <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 > > -- > > Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal > Phone:+1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522> > 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 > Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help > protect the environment > > <oracle_sig_logo.gif><green-for-email-sig_0.gif> > > -- > <image001.gif> <http://www.oracle.com> > Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal > Phone:+1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522> > 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 > <image002.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>Oracle is committed > to developing practices and products that help protect the environment > -- Oracle <http://www.oracle.com> Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064 Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 17:35:08 UTC