W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: AUWG Action: to Track down our text re: passing through content authored on other tools

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:33:32 -0400
Message-ID: <49F7681C.6050008@utoronto.ca>
To: WAI-AUWG List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Looking at this some more...I see we have notes on applicability in the 
"Definition of authoring tool" section as well as at the top of Parts A 
and B.

I think we should:

(1) reserve the "Definition of authoring tool" section for notes about 
authoring tools in general (e.g., the list of examples and the note on 
real-time tools), which means moving the other note ("Any guidelines 
that require authors to modify content in some way always assumes that 
the person has author permission.") down to Part B (with the handle 
"Author Permission").

(2) Re-work the points in Part B, so that they now read (especially see #5):

1. Authoring Systems: As per the definition of authoring tool, several 
software tools can be used in conjunction to meet the requirements of 
Part B (e.g. an authoring tool could make use of a third-party software 
accessibility checking and repair application).

2. Author Permission: Any success criteria in Part B that may require 
modification of content only apply when an *author* has *author permission*.

3. Author Availability: Any success criteria in Part B that refer to 
authors only apply during *authoring sessions*.

4. Responsibility after the *End of Authoring Sessions*: Authoring tools 
are not responsible for accessibility problems that result from carrying 
out instructions made by authors during a previous authoring session 
(e.g., displaying third-party content specified by an author). Authoring 
tools are responsible for any changes that are automatically-generated 
(e.g., when a CMS *developer* makes site-wide changes).

5. Outputted vs. Referenced Web Content: The success criteria in Part B 
apply to only Web content technologies that the authoring tool outputs 
and which have been listed in the conformance profile. The success 
criteria in Part B do not apply to Web content technologies that an 
authoring tool is only able to reference (e.g., by URI), but not output. 
For example, a particular HTML authoring tool might insert an image by 
outputting HTML content (e.g., an img element) and referencing the image 
content (e.g., a URI to a PNG image). By Part B, that authoring tool 
must provide supports for HTML *accessible authoring practices* (e.g., 
providing alt text for images), but not for PNG accessible authoring 
practices (e.g., ensuring sufficient contrast).


BTW: I think we should ensure that widget sets (e.g. DOJO) can be 
included as technologies in conformance claims separate from their 
constituent technologies (e.g., HTML, Javascript) because I can imagine 
an editor that can support an author in creating an accessible DOJO form 
but that can't support in the production of accessible Javascript in 



Jan Richards wrote:
> Hi all,
> Here's the ATAG 2.0 text I was looking for:
> "Existing Technologies: The success criteria in Part B only apply to 
> support for accessible authoring practices that are relevant to 
> technologies that the authoring tool already has the ability to create 
> or edit. For example, a markup authoring tool that adds images by simply 
> linking to their URIs would be required to support the production of 
> alternative text for images in the markup, but it would not be required 
> to add image editing functionality to ensure sufficient contrast in case 
> any images are of text."
> I think this could be made more clear (especially the handle). More 
> thoughts to follow later in the week.
> Cheers,
> -Jan

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

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2009 20:34:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:57 UTC