W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2004

Configurability in ATAG2.0

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:45:33 -0400
Message-ID: <40C4B7CD.2040509@utoronto.ca>
To: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org

Hi,

As Tim points out at the end of his message, maybe we do need a new 
checkpoint(!) that would be devoted to configurability. At the moment 
"configurability" exists in ATAG2.0 as a kind of note in checkpoint 3.1 
(technique 3.1.1) and as a small bit of checkpoint 4.4.

A new checkpoint under GL4 (where the rest of our meta-requirements 
live) could pull together some of these ideas in one place.

Reaction?

Cheers,
Jan

-- 
Jan Richards, M.Sc.
User Interface Design Specialist
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC), University of Toronto

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896



Tim Boland wrote:

> 
> For  my first action item from the May 24 AUWG telecon, Karen Mardahl 
> has kindly offered to assist
> me with this item, so I have sent some text to Karen for comment.  If 
> she agrees, I am happy to release
> to the group for discussion.
> 
> 
> Following is text I promised as the second of my action items from the 
> May 24 AUWG telecon.
> 
> To be added right before "Technique 3.1.1 title":
> 
> "NOTE: It is a goal (not a requirement?) that all available (to the 
> user) accessibility
> features of an authoring tool be as configurable (by the user) as 
> possible.  For example,
> an authoring tool may have a few defined options, and permission to 
> configure those options,
> or perhaps an authoring tool may use a free-form style sheet.  The 
> developer of an authoring
> tool should make every effort to accommodate the wishes of a user in 
> development.  For an authoring
> tool, a description of all accessibility features provided and degree of 
> user configurability of each feature
> should be documented."
> 
> Comments welcomed and appreciated.  Should any of this go into the 
> Guidelines (if not there already?)
> 
> Best wishes, Tim Boland NIST
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 7 June 2004 14:46:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:49 UTC