W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2005

Some comments about ATAG 2.0 WD 22 nov 04

From: Pasquale Popolizio <pasquale@osservatoriosullacomunicazione.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:49:04 +0100
To: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BE0C48F0.6BEE%pasquale@osservatoriosullacomunicazione.com>

Hi all,

some comments about ATAG 2.0 WD 22 nov 04.
 
General comment:
If printed, it's difficult to read linked blue terms (color: #00C) on cyan
background (color: #CFF) in ³Success Criteria² boxes.
Suggestion: in CSS for print, no cyan background-color in ³Success Criteria²
boxes.
 
 
Then, in details:
 
1.3 Role of authoring tools in Web accessibility
A comment about word ³ability² in the sentence: ³Everyone should have the
ability to create and access Web content.²
I think ³ability² is about ³talent².
Suggestion: use, for example, the word ³possibility². ³Everyone should have
the possibility to create and access Web content.²
 
 
1.4 Relationship with other guidelines and standards
It's very hard and difficult to read. Point 1.4.2 it¹s very confusing.
 
 
3.1.2 Checkpoint Priorities
It's very difficult to understand.
Document says:
³Every checkpoint in ATAG 2.0 has been assigned one of three priority levels
that indicate the importance of the checkpoint in satisfying the guideline
under which the checkpoint appears. The priority of a checkpoint determines
whether that checkpoint must be met by a tool in order for that tool to
achieve a particular ATAG 2.0 conformance level.
The checkpoint priority levels used in ATAG 2.0 are:
Priority 1:
    * For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy
this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find
it impossible to author for the Web.
    * For Guideline 2, 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is essential for
authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to
WCAG.
Priority 2:
    * For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy
this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find
it difficult to author for the Web.
    * For Guideline 2, 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is important for
authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to
WCAG.
Priority 3:
    * For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy
this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find
it inefficient to author for the Web.
    * For Guideline 2, 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is beneficial for
authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to
WCAG.²
 

Comment:
There are checkpoint priority level but also also Relative Priority
Checkpoints: Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG, Authoring Interface
Checkpoints Relative to WCAG, Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to
ISO-TS-16071.
In Guideline 1 and in Guideline 2 there¹re no checkpoints with priority 3
level. Also, in Guideline 4 there¹s no checkpoints with priority 1 level.
In fact 1.1, 1.2, 2.3, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 haven't priority levels but
Relative Priority. 
 
 
In fact, in the document, the checkpoints priorities in the Guidelines are:

Guideline 1
1.1 [Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to WCAG or Authoring Interface
Checkpoints Relative to ISO-TS-16071]
1.2 [Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to WCAG or Authoring Interface
Checkpoints Relative to ISO-TS-16071]
1.3 [Priority 1]
1.4 [Priority 2]
1.5 [Priority 2]
 
Guideline 2
2.1 [Priority 1]
2.2 [Priority 2]
2.3 [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
2.4 [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
 
Guideline 3
3.1 [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
3.2 [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
3.3 [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
3.4 [Priority 1]
3.5 [Priority 3]
3.6 [Priority 3]
3.7 [Priority 2]
3.8 [Priority 3]
3.9 [Priority 3]
 
Guideline 4
4.1 [Priority 2]
4.2 [Priority 2]
4.3 [Priority 2]
4.4 [Priority 3]
 
 
Suggestion: modify whole 3.1.2 paragraph to explain in better way that there
are Regular Priority Checkpoints and Relative Priority Checkpoints (like
explained in Figure 1) and how the Conformance scheme works.

For example, it could be (re)written (but I don't think it is the best way):
³The checkpoint priority levels used in ATAG 2.0 are:
Priority 1:
    * For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy
this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find
it impossible to author for the Web.
    * For Guideline 2, 3 checkpoints: The checkpoint is essential for
authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to
WCAG. (here, we can't mention Guideline 4 because there's no Priority 1
level in Guideline 4)
Priority 2:
    * For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy
this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find
it difficult to author for the Web.
    * For Guideline 2, 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is important for
authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to
WCAG.
Priority 3:
    * For Guideline 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is beneficial for
authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to
WCAG.² (here, we can't mention Guideline 1 and 2 because there's no Priority
3 level in Guideline 1 and 2)
 

Regards,
Ciao



Pasquale



 
 
 
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2005 14:49:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:37 GMT