W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 1998

Re: Here's your chance to have your say

From: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 19:27:15 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981102192715.00947a10@localhost>
To: jan.richards@utoronto.ca, Jutta Treviranus <jutta.treviranus@utoronto.ca>, w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Hi AU Editors,

Thanks for getting the new draft out. This again represents a significant
improvement. 

I've put * next to items that I hope can get changed before it goes out for
IG review tomorrow. Other items could be changed over the next week. 

Thanks,

Judy

Comments, Nov. 2:

*- document title should be "WAI Authoring Tool Guidelines"

*- would be helpful to have at least a paragraph in the abstract that
explains why the document is needed, i.e., to provide guidance on
accessibility of the authoring tool user interface, on implementation of
accessibility improvements in Web technologies, and on making accessible
Web design more "automatic" through prompting, alerts, and verification of
features related to accessibility.

*- in the current abstract, why specify "user-authored" Web pages? Unclear
whether or not that would apply to conversion tools. And why exclude the
possibility of covering applications that dynamically generate Web pages?
In fact it contradicts the "Introduction." 

*- add "W3C" in front of "Web Accessibility Initiative" under "Abstract"

*- Status of this document: you are still refering to the User Agent
Working Group, even though the abbreviation given is AU. 

*- can you run it through a spell-checker? would help.

*- 1.1 is unclear. looks like it is introducing two documents. I think you
mean that the AUGL cover two different kinds of issues.

- 1.2 looks like it could benefit from some working group discussion to
refine the ideas of priorities. My guess is that the priorities would play
out differently for user interface issues than for accessibility support
issues. That doesn't come through in the fundamental/important/promotes
distinction, which seems vague to me.

*- 2.1 definition of authoring tool "in the editing of markup [(ADD)and
presentation] language documents."

- 2.1 in my comments of Oct 8 I had recommended including site management
tools, image-editors, video-editors, and multi-media authoring tools among
the definitions up front, unless there was some reason not to. Was there
any comment back on this? I notice that in 3.A.5 they are covered. Might as
well include them in 2.1 then.

- 2.2 These terms either need to be defined here, or to have a clearer link
to their definitions. All they link to right now is the reference section
of this document. Actually I think they should be defined here.

*- 2.7 & 2.8 In my comments last time, I suggested that 2.7, insertion &
editing, might not be necessary. These are still there, but 2.8, prompting
and emphasis, is missing-in-action. Whether or not you keep insertion &
editing, please don't drop definitions of prompting & emphasis.

- 3.A.1 This is a good addition. Note though that DHTML is not a W3C
specification. Where you have listed documents, I think you'll need to list
features. Or we need to improve the feature list to point to. Can anyone
else comment? For Page Authoring implementation priorities, it at least
needs pointers to a specific part of the document, for instance the
guidelines or technical features index at the back? Any other opinions on
this?

- 3.A.2 Yes. Good. This is from Carl's comment? Overall though maybe it is
a priority 2? Not sure.

- 3.B.2 Overall, the "rationale" statements are much clearer in this
version. I still think they need work though, both in terms of
clarity/strength, and objectivity/flow. For instance, under 3.B.2, "Provide
rationales that stress Universal Design": 
	"As most users have little knowledge of accessibility issues, 
	it is understandable that they will question the justification 
	for abiding accessibility prompts. Authors must be made to understand 
	why time and effort should be devoted to accessibility issues that 
	they may feel are not relevant to themselves." 
How about this instead:
	"Most users are unfamiliar with accessibility issues on the Web. By 
	incorporating explanations of universal design benefits into authoring 
	tools, authors will better understand the value of accessible page design."

3.C.2 "Ensure that all markup inserted through the user interface is
accessible."
Sounds nice, but impossible. Given that much of document markup is
automatically generated, and much of accessibility requires response to
prompting, this isn't controllable by the authoring tool.

5.1 "Alert Techniques" Can you call some of these "alerts" rather than
"warnings"? For some, such as non-obtrusive ones, "alerts" sounds friendlier.

6.2 Remove the Tables module placeholder. Add in later if it materializes.

6.3 If possible, a brief file conversion module should be added before it
goes to IG, assuming the AU WG members have reviewed and discussed some
version of this.

7. Acknowledgements should be drafted

###

At 01:53 PM 11/2/98 -0500, Jutta Treviranus wrote:
>To all AU working group members:
>
>The Guidelines Working Draft will be going out to the WAI interest group
>tomorrow, November the 3rd. Could you please review it. Any comments that
>come back to the list by the end of the working day today will be
>incorporated before the draft is put out for interest group review.
>
>The document that is now up is without a table of contents, this will be
>added this evening. There will also be an additional recommendation in
>section 3c related to conversion tools (note that there are 3
>recommendation on this topic there already). The two "modules" or
>implemenation examples on tables and conversion tools will not go into this
>round of the public working draft.
>These topics will be covered in section 3 instead and these sections may be
>added at a later date.
>
>The document will go out as a public working draft on November 11, and will
>be highlighted at the Advisory Committee meeting in Kyoto. Even if you have
>no specific revisions, any comments on the overall document would be
>appreciated.
>
>Thanks Jutta
>
----------
Judy Brewer    jbrewer@w3.org    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) International Program Office
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
MIT/LCS Room NE43-355, 545 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA
Received on Monday, 2 November 1998 19:29:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:41 UTC