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

Warnings about access info loss (MS21)

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 23:22:41 +0000
To: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EE5A343E-9204-4E5F-887B-B252A46E6AE1@nomensa.com>
Hi Jan & Greg,

We're down to tackle comment MS21 about B.1.2.2. My summary would be:

- When a transformation from one type of content to another is made, the accessibility information should be preserved (covered in B.1.2.1).
- If it cannot be preserved (generally when going to a format which has less / different possible methods), then the user should be warned (contested in B.1.2.2).

Complicating factors are that:
- Copy and paste is a common 'transfer' method, and it would be annoying to get that message every time.
- A company couldn't put a derogatory message about someone else's format.

I think it is important to have a warning, as that can/should prompt a check after the transformation. However, I can see the usability issue if that happens often (i.e. the 'cry-wolf' dialogue).

We could add a line to the proposed part b:
"(b) Warning: if accessibility information required to meet the WCAG 2.0 success criteria will not be preserved in the output, then authors are warned (e.g., when saving a structured graphic to a raster image format). Authors may be allowed to set a preference to prevent the warning."

However, that does lead to whether the warnings should be per transformation type? (e.g. Word to HTML, or SVG to raster).
Or perhaps it should be per accessibility issue? I.e. If copy and paste looses alt text in one instance, that would be different from just loosing HTML structure in another instance.

Or am I making this even more complex!?

Kind regards,

-Alastair

--
Alastair Campbell           |  Director of User Experience
Received on Monday, 1 November 2010 23:23:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 1 November 2010 23:23:15 GMT