W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: "to urge, suggest or dictate"

From: <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 15:07:43 -0400
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Message-ID: <852568EA.00691487.00@d54mta04.raleigh.ibm.com>

PJ has the following comments to the "unresolved" :

Jutta wrote:
> Towards a better definition of "prompt" the following is my reading
> of where the group is at with respect to the issues regarding
> "prompt:"
> We have general agreement that:
> <clip>
> - equivalent text deserves special support within the authoring tool,
> because it can involve the greatest amount of work for the author,
> and because of it's importance within WCAG, therefore we want to do
> more than what is encompassed within guidelines 4 and 5. We want to
> do more than check, repair and provide help. We also don't want to
> depend upon the author to seek out support. The additional support or
> prompting should be initiated by the tool if a problem is detected,
> not requested by the author.

PJ: Since this will become the basis of the actual definition text in the
glossary, allow me to slightly change the last two sentences:

...therefore "prompt" is different than what is encompassed within
guidelines 4, 5, and 6:
     4. Provide ways of checking and correcting inaccessible content.
     5. Integrate accessibility solutions into the overall "look and feel".

     6. Promote accessibility in help and documentation.
"Prompting" is more than checking, correcting, and providing help and
documentation. "Prompting" should be integrated into the overall "look and
feel" of the tool.  "Prompting" does not depend upon the author to seek out
the support.  "Prompting" is initiated by the tool, not requested by the

> Beyond the implementation details the sticking points we can't reach
> agreement on are:
> - whether the prompt requires author response or requests author response
> - whether the prompt must occur within the same authoring session
> - whether the prompting must be on by default

PJ: If, how, and when the author responds to the "prompt" depends on the
design of the tool and the overall "look and feel" of the prompt.  Using
the phrase "requires" seems to cause interpretations problems when
determining compliance.  Specifying when - as in "during the same authoring
session", specifying "requires a response", and "must be on", are "look and
feel" design considerations that we should not dictate with the
Recommendation. I believe we could and should add information in the
techniques that these things should be considered when integrating
"prompts" into the tool - and that the techniques detailed have considered
these things.

> The general goal of the guideline is to:
> - encourage, urge and support the author in creating meaningful
> equivalent text without causing frustration that may cause the author
> to turn off access options
> - cause a positive disposition and awareness on the part of the
> author toward accessible authoring practices.

PJ: I agree, but that is what is covered in the text after the Guideline 3
heading.  I do not think we need a proposed re-wording in the guidelines
text nor additional wording in the definition of "prompt" text.

Phill Jenkins
Received on Thursday, 25 May 2000 15:13:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:44 UTC