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

Re: WCAG WG comments on ATAG working draft of 21 May 2009

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:33:56 -0400
Message-ID: <4A3123E4.1040707@utoronto.ca>
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Following up on the comment re: A.1.2, I suggest we simplify down to one 
success criterion for A.1.2 - similar to UAAG 1.0's 7.3 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-USERAGENT/guidelines.html#tech-os-conventions):

A.1.2.1: Non-Web-Based Accessible (Level A): Non-Web-based authoring 
tool user interfaces follow (and cite in the conformance claim) 
standards and/or platform conventions that benefit accessibility. (Level A)


I think this strikes a pretty good balance. The Claimant lists the 
standards/conventions they used and because our techniques document has 
  a fairly good list (including the ISO standard, 508, etc.) it would be 
easy to spot a standard that had been pulled oiut of left-field.

Cheers,
Jan




>> See Guideline A.1.2.
>> 
>>    "Non-Web-based authoring tool user interfaces follow  requirements
>> [which] are those that are functionally equivalent to WCAG 2.0 
>> success criteria. "
>> 
>> We believe that what it means for a non-web-based authoring tool to be
>> functionally equivalent to WCAG 2.0  is undefined. This is very
>> important, but it is a large task and  may not be a WAI problem to
>> solve.
>> 
>> Could/should desktop accessibility standards like ANSI/HFES 200 Part 2
>> / ISO 9241-171 be used instead? e.g.
>>    "Non-Web-based authoring tool user interfaces follow accessibility
>> standards for desktop software. The following are some example
>> software accessibility standards: ISO, Section 508 1194.21."
>> 
>> We don't think that multiple levels are necessary. (A122, A123). These
>> standards don't necessarily have comparable levels.
> 
> JR: We've already looked at the ISO reference - but it's not currently 
> free so it couldn't be a normative reference. I do agree however that 
> the "functionally equivalent" formulation is tricky. MAYBE we can say it 
> is Level A to respect Non-Web Platform conventions with a formulation 
> similar to UAAG 1.0's 7.3 
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-USERAGENT/guidelines.html#tech-os-conventions)

-- 
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 Thursday, 11 June 2009 15:34:35 UTC

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