W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 2006

ATAG 2.0 In-group checkpoint review: B.2.7(+)

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:05:34 -0500
Message-ID: <442D615E.4060700@utoronto.ca>
To: "List (WAI-AUWG)" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>

Hi,

Two weeks ago I volunteered to review B.2.7 (and as you can see the 
review has spilled over to a few other checkpoints). Here are my 
thoughts so far:

----------

Points for Discussion:

IN GUIDELINES:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2006/WD-ATAG20-20060322/WD-ATAG20-20060322.html#check-document-features

1) It seems to me that there could be a bit of confusion involving 
"documentation" (i.e. the help system) and "repair instructions" (i.e. 
some particular help for authors in fixing content, which may or may not 
be in the help system). This involves:

B.2.3 ("Assist authors in repairing accessibility problems")

B.2.7 ("Document in the help system all features of the tool that 
support the production of accessible content.")

B.2.8 ("Ensure that accessibility is demonstrated in all documentation 
and help, including examples.")

B.3.2 ("Ensure that accessibility prompting, checking, repair functions, 
and documentation are always clearly available to the author.") and

B.3.4. ("B.3.4 Ensure that accessibility prompting, checking, repair 
functions and documentation are configurable")

To clarify, I suggest:

-------

[action 1] Moving checkpoint B.2.7 to Section B.3 (I think it fits under 
"integration") and rewording it as:

"Document features of the tool that support the production of accessible 
content."



[action 2] Changing the success criterion to specifically reference the 
features related to section B.2, for example:

SC 1. All features of the tool that play a role in satisfying the 
success criteria for checkpoints B.2.1, B.2.2, B.2.3, B.2.5, B.2.6 and 
B.2.9 must be documented in the help system.

(note the wording parallels A.3.3)



[action 3] Moving B.2.8 to Section B.3 (I think it fits under 
"promoting") and rewording it as:

"Ensure that any authoring practices demonstrated in *repair 
instructions* or documentation are accessible"

(note that repair instructions, a term used in B.2.3, is separated from 
help system-type documentation.



[action 4] Reword B.3.2 and its success criteria to follow the new 
pattern in [actions 1 and 2]:

"Ensure that features of the tool that support the production of 
accessible content are always clearly available to the author."

"SC1: All features of the tool that play a role in satisfying the 
success criteria for checkpoints B.2.1, B.2.2, B.2.3, B.2.5, B.2.6 and 
B.2.9 that are continuously active must always be enabled by default and 
if the author disables them (e.g. from a preferences screen), then the 
tool must inform the author that this may increase the risk of 
accessibility problems.

"SC2: All features of the tool that play a role in satisfying the 
success criteria for checkpoints B.2.1, B.2.2, B.2.3, B.2.5, B.2.6 and 
B.2.9 must have at least match the prominence of prompting, checking, 
and repair features related to other types of Web content problems (e.g. 
markup validity, program code syntax, spelling and grammar)."



[action 5] Reword B.3.4 and it's success criteria to follow the new 
pattern in [actions 1 and 2]:

"Ensure that features of the tool that support the production of 
accessible content are configurable."

"SC1: The configurability of features of the tool that play a role in 
satisfying the success criteria for checkpoints B.2.1, B.2.2, B.2.3, 
B.2.5, B.2.6 and B.2.9 must at least match the configurability of 
prompting, checking, and repair features related to other types of Web 
content problems (e.g. markup validity, program code syntax, spelling 
and grammar), in terms of both of the following:
(a) the range of options controllable by the author, and
(b) the degree to which each option can be controlled "

-------

2) The priority (P2) is ok.

3) The rationale is ok.

4) The current success criteria may be too vague, since all features may 
have some impact on accessibility.

See [action 2] above.



Cheers,
Jan
Received on Friday, 31 March 2006 17:06:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 September 2008 15:53:06 GMT