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

Re: Checkpoints for Guideline 1

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:59:49 -0400 (EDT)
To: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0107091255150.14106-100000@tux.w3.org>
On the call today we seemed to be leaning towards the idea that content must
be preserved, and that structure should be preserved, but it structure is not
preserved the author must be informed.

Maybe that is enough for expressing the minimum requirement - proposal:
Accessbility content must be preserved. Where sufficient structure
information to allow reversal of the transformation is not
preserved, the author must be notified that the transformation cannot be
reversed accessibly.

more thoughts:
Perhaps it leads to a P2 checkpoint, which requires (at the lower priority
level) that the structure is preserved.

One possible technique to do this is to link to a reversal method, for
example when going between XML languages an XSLT, or when going to plain text
a perl script that recognises markers inserted (underlining, for example) and
converts back to the approriate markup.

Charles McCN

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Phill Jenkins wrote:

  I have a concern or question with the phrase "Where this is not reversible
  ".  From the context, I'm not sure what "this" is referring to.

  If "this" is referring to fact that if the tool does maintain all the
  accessibility information but does not allow the process of conversion to
  be reversed, then it must *also* inform the author, then I do have a
  concern.  Why do I have to inform the author if the information is
  maintained?

  If "this" is referring to *only* the fact that the conversion process is
  not reversible, independent of whether or not it maintains accessibility
  information, then I have a concern.  I believe we should only minimally
  require the "reverse function" when the accessibility information is not
  maintained.  Which I think is the desire of the working group.

  Proposed new wording:

  Minimum functionality: All accessibility information [content & logical
  structure] present in the initial document or fragment must be present in
  the transformed result. Where the accessibility information is not
  preserved and the process is not reversible, inform the author.


  Regards,
  Phill Jenkins,  (512) 838-4517
  IBM Research Division - Accessibility Center
  11501 Burnet Rd,  Austin TX  78758    http://www.ibm.com/able


-- 
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 Monday, 9 July 2001 12:59:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:46 UTC