RE: Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last Call WD

This looks fine to me too.  Thanks for addressing it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Marcos Caceres [mailto:marcosscaceres@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 4:32 AM
To: Arthur Barstow
Cc: Sally Cain; Steven Faulkner; Cynthia Shelly; wai-xtech@w3.org; public-webapps
Subject: Re: Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last Call WD

Art, Sally, Steve, All

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote:
> Sally, Steve, All
>
> FYI, Cynthia Shelly [CS] submitted comments that are similar to the ones you
> submitted regarding requirement #37 [37] of the Widgets Requirement LC WD
> [LC].
>
> Both Marcos [MC] and I [AB] replied to Cynthia's comments. We agree the
> wording in sentences #2 and #3 needs work and the tentative resolution is to
> replace this requirement with text like:
>
> [[
> A conforming specification must specify that the language used to declare
> the user interface of a widget be either HTML or a language that is
> accessible as defined by [WCAG-2].
> ]]
>

The text as it stands today is as follows. I have not had a chance to
fully address everyone's feedback on this thread yet but will do so by
the end of the week. Please feel free to comment on the current text.

--
R37. Language Accessibility
A conforming specification MUST specify that the language used to
declare the user interface of a widget be either HTML or a language
that is accessible at the various levels specified by the WCAG 2.0
(perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust): specifically, the
language MUST provide keyboard access to interactive graphical
elements, and provide means to access the widget's functionality
through a non-graphical UI. The user interface language MUST also be
accessible to screen readers, allowing relevant sections of text and
functionality to be accessed by non-visual means.

Motivation:
  Compatibility with other standards, current development practice or
industry best-practices, ease of use, accessibility.
Rationale:
  To recommend a language, or a set of languages, that will allow
authors to realize their designs, while at the same time remaining
accessible to screen readers and similar assistive technologies.
--

Kind regards,
Marcos



--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au

Sample disclaimer text

Received on Friday, 8 August 2008 18:16:57 UTC