W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: ATAG2 - Guideline 7

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:51:48 -0400 (EDT)
To: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
cc: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0104251942150.32010-100000@tux.w3.org>
I agree with the proposals for 7.2 and 7.3.

I think we should still have the search functionality as a requirement.
Although this is a common enough feature of text document and markup editors
it is not as common in multimedia editors, and it is useful to provide
techniques for it.  Admittedly, it is a subset of navigation methods - as
well as navigating by the structure it is useful to be able to navigate to
points known or presumed to exist. This is not a P1 requirement, but it is
still something that should be done at some level of conformance.

My comments on Jan's proposals for 7.1 and 7.4 are below after each proposal
- look for "CMN"

chaals

  7.1 Ensure that the user interface of the authoring tool follows all
  applicable operating system and accessibility standards and conventions.
  [Priority 1 for standards and conventions essential to accessibility;
  Priority 2 for those important to accessibility; Priority 3 for those
  beneficial to accessibility]

  The techniques for this checkpoint include references to
  platform-specific checklists and guidelines and to general guidelines
  for accessible applications.

CMN Agree. I would add to the note "In many cases several sets of standards
will be applicable".

  -----

  7.4 Ensure that the user interface of the authoring tool enables the
  user to edit the document structure and all available properties of each
  element of the document in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1]

  At minimum, this means ensuring that there is at least one means, that
  complies with Checkpoint 7.1, of editing or changing every property
  (that is available to be changed and edited by the tool). More useful
  implementations might ensure that all means for editing or changing
  propeties be accessible.

CMN disagree. This porposal seems to have lost the "edit the structure"
requirement that it has absorbed in its minimum requirements. I would instead
keep it as two checkpoints, the first having "edit propoerties" and the
minimum requirement as expressed, and the second as follows:

 Ensure that the user interface enables the author to edit the structure of
 the document in an accessible fashion

 At minimum, allow the user to copy, cut or paste an element and its content
 at any level of the document tree hierarchy. More useful implementations may
 provide advanced features for modifying the stucture.

  -----

  Cheers,
  Jan

  /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

  Jan Richards
  Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
  University of Toronto

  jan.richards@utoronto.ca
  Tel: (416) 946-7060  Fax: (416) 971-2896

  /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\


-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 19:54:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 September 2008 15:53:00 GMT