Re: ATAG Techniques submission and some questions?

To reply to your questions.

1) Given that these are illustrative suggestions the more detail the 
better as long as the detail does not constrain the approach taken 
and as long as we make it clear that this is one possible approach 
and not the only possible approach.

2) This is a good question we should discuss in the group. Several 
members have felt that if we suggest ways to not do what is requested 
but to compensate for the lack of compliance we may be giving 
developers an easy way out.

3) We have agreed that the user has the last say. If they wish to 
turn off any of the features there has to be a way to do it.

Jutta

At 10:06 AM -0400 5/17/04, Tim Boland wrote:
Hi, I tried fleshing out a sample technique topic (3.1.2(18) - Style 
Sheets), and the
attached has a sample scenario and a few additional detailed 
techniques.  Is this
a reasonable approach?   If so I can tackle other topics?    If these 
techniques are
to be used in any way to satisfy conformance claims in the future, it 
would seem to
me that they may be "normative" in some sense..

Some questions when I was doing this exercise:

(1) How detailed should the techniques language be?

(2) Suppose the user specifies a request for prompting and assistance 
that the tool
is not able to satisfy?   Should there be some sort of negotiation 
involved then?

(3) Should the user be given the option to "ignore" any assisting messages and
still claim conformance (since the idea is that prompts/assists 
should promote a
positive attitude towards accessibility in the user , but the user 
already knows
about accessibility and doesn't want any extraneous messages?)?

Thanks and best wishes, Tim Boland NIST

Attachment converted: newMacintosh HD:atag3.htm (TEXT/text) (00051632)

Received on Monday, 17 May 2004 12:07:25 UTC