W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: Attempt to simplify and harmonize "content display" vs. "chrome" distinction in ATAG2 and UAAG2

From: Michael A Squillace <masquill@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:34:55 -0500
To: "AUWG " <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF08F6A884.C0B847FB-ON85257483.0059F668-86257483.005B19CB@us.ibm.com>

So, pondering what Al wrote:

 > To me, the only clean statement is something like "features and
 > functions" which the UA presents to the user through the UI that are
 > independent of the content vs. those that reflect an interpretation of
 > the content.

and given that this is what we're trying to distinguish, it seems now
misleading to discuss "views" or other GUI artifacts at all. Part of the
problem (or, at least, part of my problem), I think, is conflating UI with
GUI. We're drawing a line based on features and functionality, not on, as
Al put it, "layout rectangles." What would we say, for instance, about an
authoring tool the display of which consisted only of an interpretation of
the content and all other features and functionality were accessed via
speech I/O? In this case, there would be  no "chrome" or "UI components
independent of content" or "user interface," as we have understood these
terms.

So I'd add the following choices to your list of possible terms, Jan:
1. FOR UI STUFF THAT DEPENDS ON CONTENT:
"Chrome"
"content view"
"UI set by content"
"UI dependent on content"
"content View Mode" (suggests Reed)
"content-laiden features/functionality"
"content-oriented functionality"
2. FOR UI STUFF THAT DOESN'T DEPEND ON CONTENT:
"content display"
"user interface excluding content views"
"UI not set by content"
"UI independent of content"
"user interface" (suggests Reed)
"content-independent functionality"

--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX

W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066

masquill@us.ibm.com
www.ibm.com/able


                                                                           
             Jan Richards                                                  
             <jan.richards@uto                                             
             ronto.ca>                                                  To 
             Sent by:                  Michael A                           
             w3c-wai-au-reques         Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS          
             t@w3.org                                                   cc 
                                       w3c-wai-au@w3.org                   
                                                                   Subject 
             07/10/2008 03:58          Re: Attempt to simplify and         
             PM                        harmonize "content display" vs.     
                                       "chrome"    distinction  in ATAG2   
                                       and UAAG2                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           





Hi Michael,

I think we will need the "Applicability" section either way because we
need to explain why we're putting labels of any kind after our success
criteria. But we could use "content view(s)" and "user interface
excluding content views" as the labels we explain that section.

So...terminology possibilities so far (plus a few further brainstorms):

1. FOR UI STUFF THAT DEPENDS ON CONTENT:
"Chrome"
"content view"
"UI set by content"
"UI dependent on content"
"content View Mode" (suggests Reed)

2. FOR UI STUFF THAT DOESN'T DEPEND ON CONTENT:
"content display"
"user interface excluding content views"
"UI not set by content"
"UI independent of content"
"user interface" (suggests Reed)


Not to complicate things further but a further useful distinction is
between content marked up semantically and not (e.g. AJAX without ARIA).


Cheers,
Jan



Michael A Squillace wrote:
>
> That's fine but I like the original terms better and using "content
> view" v. "USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT VIEWS" seems to convey more
> about what we're actually trying to distinguish. What about just
> "content view" and "non-content view?" The approach below seems a bigger
> hit editorially, right?
>
> --> Mike Squillace
> IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
> Austin, TX
>
> W:512.823.7423
> M:512.970.0066
>
> masquill@us.ibm.com
> www.ibm.com/able
>
>
> *Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>*
> Sent by: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org
>
> 07/10/2008 01:02 PM
>
>
> To
>            WAI-AUWG List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>, WAI-UA list
<w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
>            Re: Attempt to simplify and harmonize "content display" vs.
"chrome"
> distinction in ATAG2 and UAAG2
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Talking with Jeanne the other day she was a bit concerned about the
> length of one of the terms I'm proposing to replace "Content Display"
> and "Chrome".
>
> "CONTENT VIEWS"
> "USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT VIEWS"
>
> Thinking about it more, maybe we can get around this somewhat in the way
> the terms are used...
>
> we could add an "Applicability" section to both documents modeled on the
> some similar text from the Conformance Profiles section of UAAG 1.0:
>
> PROPOSED TEXT:
>
> Applicability:
>
> In some cases, a success criteria may apply equally well to all aspects
> of the [authoring tool/user agent] user interface, including *content
> views*. However, in other cases it is necessary to remove ambiguity
> about the scope of a success criteria, in which case one of the
> following labels will appear:
>
> - Applies to *content view(s)* only
>
> - Does not apply to *content view(s)*
>
>
> Thoughts,
> Jan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jan Richards wrote:
>  >
>  > Hi all,
>  >
>  > Both ATAG2 and UAAG2 often require specific terms to distinguish the
>  > part of the user interface that reflects the content being
>  > editing/viewed and the part that is the software's own. For some time
>  > we've tried using the terms "content display" and "chrome", but
"chrome"
>  > is especially off-putting for people. Also the fact the "chrome"
covers
>  > help documentation, which might be HTML pages is also confusing.
>  >
>  > So here's another terminological try (note: [/] denotes AU/UA
> versions)...
>  >
>  > [AUTHORING TOOL/USER AGENT] USER INTERFACE
>  > The display and control mechanism that [authors/people] use to
>  > communicate with and operate the [authoring tool/user agent] software.
A
>  > user interface may be non-Web-based or Web-based or a combination
(e.g.,
>  > a non-Web-based [authoring tool/browser] might have on-line help
pages).
>  > For the purposes of these guidelines, there is an important
distinction
>  > between (1) *CONTENT VIEW(S)* the accessibility of which often depends
>  > to some extent on the content being [edited/rendered, played or
>  > executed] and (2) the rest of the [authoring tool/user agent] user
>  > interface (referred to as the *USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT
VIEWS*)
>  > the accessibility of which does not depend on the content being
>  > [edited/rendered].
>  >
>  > CONTENT VIEW
>  > The [authoring tool/user agent] user interface functionality that
>  > presents content for user interaction. Content views may be
>  > distinguished by:
>  >
>  > (1) *Editability*: some content views allow authors to modify the
>  > content as displayed (e.g., [an "editing view"/an editable "source
>  > view"]), while others do not (e.g., [a "preview" feature/the rendered
>  > view typical of browsers, a read-only "source view"]).
>  >
>  > (2) *Nature of rendering*:
>  >
>  > (a) *instruction level content views* present the content
>  > encoding instructions in non-rendered form (e.g., [plain text editing
>  > views, form-based editing views that provide direct access to the
>  > instructions such as selecting attribute values/"source view"]).
>  >
>  > (b) *rendered content views* result from fully or partially rendering,
>  > playing, or executing the content. The broad range of potential
>  > renderings covers conventional (often called "WYSIWYG") renderings to
>  > less conventional renderings such as a graphical wavefront of an audio
>  > file or the displays of text-only browsers. *Partial renderings* are
>  > those in which some aspects of the content are rendered, played, or
>  > executed, but not others (e.g., a frame-by-frame video [editor/player]
>  > rendering the graphical aspect, but not the temporal aspect, of a
video.
>  >
>  > (c) *meta content views* present properties, metadata or other more
>  > abstract information about the content (e.g., [a content management
>  > system that creates a Web-based calendar based on the author selecting
>  > only the month and year/a "page properties" feature]).
>  >
>  > USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT VIEWS
>  > All parts of the user interface other than the content view(s).
Includes
>  > all user interface components that surround, underlie, or superimpose
>  > upon content views (e.g., text areas, menus bars, rulers, pop-up
context
>  > menus) and also other Web content made available to the author/user by
>  > the developer of the [authoring tool/user agent] (e.g. help files).
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > Any thoughts on "CONTENT VIEW" and "USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT
>  > VIEWS" as a way forward?
>  >
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  > Jan
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
> --
> Jan Richards, M.Sc.
> User Interface Design Specialist
> Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
> Faculty of Information (i-school)
> University of Toronto
>
>   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
>   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
>   Phone: 416-946-7060
>   Fax:   416-971-2896
>
>
>
>

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

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896
Received on Friday, 11 July 2008 16:35:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 September 2008 15:53:08 GMT