W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 2010

ATAG2: Checking status sc's (B.2.2.6 and B.2.2.7)

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 11:51:01 -0500
Message-ID: <4B8E9375.6090707@utoronto.ca>
To: WAI-AUWG List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Hi all,

Earlier I had proposed combining B.2.2.6 and B.2.2.7. Here's a bit more 
thinking on each of them and my new proposal:

B.2.2.6 View Status: If the authoring tool records web content 
accessibility problems found during checking, then a list of any 
problems is available to authors prior to the end of the authoring 
session. (Level AA)

-the current wording requires an amalgamated list of problems when this 
is not the only possible workflow (e.g. a check-as-you-type UI)
- instead I suggest we be more flexible and allow some other measure of 
status to be reported
B.2.2.6 Status Report: Authors can receive an accessibility status 
report based on the results of the accessibility checks. (Level AA)
Note: The format of the accessibility status is not specified. For 
example, the status might be a listing of problems detected or a WCAG 
conformance level, etc.

B.2.2.7 Save Status for Repair: If repair assistance is not provided 
during checking, then authors have the option to save a list of web 
content accessibility problems to facilitate later repair. (Level AAA)

- IMO this is a strange level-AAA SC because a tool that didn't offer 
repair assistance would have already have failed B.2.3.1 Repair 
Accessibility (Level A).
PROPOSAL: Remove the checkpoint.


(Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc.
jan.richards@utoronto.ca | 416-946-7060

Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
Faculty of Information | University of Toronto
Received on Wednesday, 3 March 2010 16:51:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:58 UTC