W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: Functionality Categories

From: Carlos A Velasco <velasco@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:56:44 +0100
Message-ID: <3C430DCC.9060306@fit.fraunhofer.de>
To: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Cc: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Hi Jan,

I believe that addressing the techniques by functionality is a good 
decision, although you have seen is tricky. I have some comments.

1) "Direct and direct" as pointed by Charles, are not common terms. I 
would name the category "Document markup creation". I would split the 
categories in WYSIWYG editors and direct editors. I also would include 
here: HTML, xHTML, XML, XSL, XSLT and CSS editors, and remove XML from 
5. Also, I think that the inclusion here of multimedia, just because of 
editing directly the code is kind of artificial. I would leave that in 
the second category.
2) Here I would include any multimedia, also SMIL, SVG, etc.
3) As examples in 3, you might include Portal tools, for example.
4) In 4 I would include Javascript, PHP, ASP, VBscript (any script in 
general), Java (applets), etc. and move X()ML to 1). Like you point out, 
here shall go any proprietary format: Flash, Director, etc.


Jan Richards wrote:

> In yesterday's conference call it was decided to define the technique
> categories as tool functionality types rather than tool types. The
> following includes this change as well as proposed re-wordings of the
> category descriptions. Pay special attention to my attempt to split
> Multimedia editors from markup editors according to the human
> readability of the formats they produce. Does this work? I would welcome
> more examples for the different categories.
> Categories of Authoring Tool Functionality
> The Authoring Tools Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) have been formulated
> to apply across a diverse range of software products that produce Web
> content. To accomplish this, the guidelines and checkpoints have been
> stated fairly generally. To offset this generality, the implementation
> techniques (in this document) have been formulated to be more specific,
> at the cost of reducing the applicability of individual techniques to
> all authoring tools.
> In order to simplify the task of determining which techniques are
> applicable to a particular authoring tool, five categories of authoring
> functionality have been defined. It is important to note that the
> categories refer to authoring functionality rather than complete
> authoring tools. This allows different aspects of a given tool to fall
> within different functionality categories. For example, an HTML
> authoring tool may feature a WYSIWYG markup editor (Category 1: Markup
> editing functionality), a javascript editor (Category 4: Programming
> functionality), and the ability to import word-processed documents
> (Category 5: Conversion functionality).
> Each category has an associated icon that will label those techniques
> that are likely to apply to products that include functionality in that
> category. Keep in mind, however, that the categories are intended as a
> guide, rather than a last word in compliance. Some techniques that are
> flagged by a category icon might not be relevant to a tool with
> functionality in that category, while other unflagged techniques, may in
> fact be relevant. To avoid missing relevant techniques, it is
> recommended that developers take the time to, at least briefly, consider
> all the techniques in this document.
> Category 1: Markup Editing Functionality
> These are tool functions that authors use to specify content and its
> presentation. These include:
> - Direct (text-based.) and indirect (WYSIWYG, object-based, etc.)
> editing of documents in markup formats (i.e. HTML, XHTML, etc.). This
> includes indirect editing by word processors that are capable of saving
> as markup formats (i.e. HTML, XHTML, etc.).
> - Direct and indirect editing of multimedia (images, animation, sound,
> video, haptics) content in human-readable formats (i.e. SVG, SMIL,
> etc.).

> Category 2: Multimedia Creation Functionality
> These are tool functions that authors use to create Web content in
> non-human-readable multimedia formats. These include
> - Indirect editing of multimedia (images, animation, sound, video,
> haptics) content in non-human-readable formats (i.e. JPEG, PNG,
> Quicktime, Flash, etc.).
> Category 3: Content Management Functionality
> These are tool functions that create and organize Web content on the
> basis of high-level author input. These include:
> - Database driven Web applications that prompt the author for
> information that is then displayed in a generic (or semi-generic) manner
> (i.e. courseware). Note that any direct or indirect authoring of the
> final markup (i.e. editing presentation templates) is considered to be
> markup editing functionality (see category 1).
> Category 4: Programming Functionality
> These are tool functions that authors use to create Web application
> code. These include:
> - Direct or indirect editing of program code (i.e. Java applets, Flash
> action script, server and client-side scripts, etc.).
> - Direct or indirect editing of markup languages grammars (i.e. XML
> languages).
> - Direct and indirect editing of style sheets (i.e. CSS).
> Category 5: Conversion Functionality
> These are tool functions that convert content in one format into another
> format. These include:
> - Converting word processor-formatted content into a markup format as it
> is imported into an editor. Note that any direct or indirect authoring
> of the converted markup, image, etc. is considered to be markup editing
> functionality (see category 1).
> - Saving multimedia content in other formats (i.e. bitmap saved as a
> jpeg, etc.).

Dr Carlos A Velasco
mailto:velasco@fit.fraunhofer.de    http://access.gmd.de/
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte Informationstechnik (FIT.HEB)
   [Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology (FIT.HEB)]
   Schloss Birlinghoven, D53757 Sankt Augustin (Germany)
   Tel: +49-2241-142609/319272 Fax: +49-2241-142065
Received on Monday, 14 January 2002 11:56:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:47 UTC