W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2009

"WAI-ARIA" instead of just "ARIA" [was Re: WAI-ARIA comments from EOWG]

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:23:00 -0600
Message-ID: <49B034A4.5040706@w3.org>
To: Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
CC: cooper@w3.org, public-pfwg-comments@w3.org
We use "WAI-ARIA" as the acronym to avoid trademark issues.

The WAI-ARIA FAQ states:
"
WAI uses "WAI-ARIA" to refer to the documents in the Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite. In order to avoid confusion, we request that others also use "WAI-ARIA", instead of just "ARIA", in documentation.
" - http://www.w3.org/WAI/aria/faq#justaria

More info is available under "Terminology and usage of "WAI-ARIA"" at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-aria-docs#notes>, which says:
* Generally use "WAI-ARIA" as the abbreviation (instead of only ARIA) 
- Always use WAI-ARIA in headings and on first use 
- In a single document where is appears frequently, it can be abbreviated to ARIA in some places; for example, see the first paragraph under "The WAI-ARIA Documents" at www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria#is
- It's fine to say just "ARIA" in casual conversation
- (This terminology and usage guidance is motivated by avoiding trademark issues.)

I'll add something to "Referencing WAI Guidelines and Technical Documents" <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/linking> for review...

Let me know if you have comments or questions...

Best,
~Shawn


-----
Shawn Lawton Henry
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
e-mail: shawn@w3.org
phone: +1.617.395.7664
about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/





Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com wrote:
> On:
> * <a>ARIA Overview</a> should be <a>WAI-ARIA Overview</a>
> I'm unclear if /all/ instances of ARIA should be presented as 
> "WAI-ARIA". My personal preference is to do "WAI-ARIA" on first use in a 
> section and plain "ARIA" after that. I believe you're requesting that 
> all instances be the long form, but I'm not clear. It's actually easier 
> just to find-replace it all to long form than to decide when to do long 
> and when to do short, but I don't know if that's best for readability.
> In my humble opinion WAI-ARIA should not appear in other places of the spec than the title. Generally speaking WAI-ARIA is a synthetic term and I don't know historical reason for sticking WAI to ARIA, we don't call WAI-WCAG or WAI-ATAG. If there is a valid reason to have WAI-ARIA as opposed to ARIA, let it be only in the title.
>  
> Anna
> 
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org]
>     *On Behalf Of *ext Michael Cooper
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:43 PM
>     *To:* Shawn Henry
>     *Cc:* public-pfwg-comments@w3.org; EOWG (E-mail)
>     *Subject:* Re: WAI-ARIA comments from EOWG
> 
>     Thanks for these comments. Here is where we're at:
> 
>     Shawn Henry wrote:
>>
>>     Dear PFWG,
>>
>>     EOWG recently discussed the WAI-ARIA documents and have the
>>     following comments. (These comments were generated by a subset of
>>     the EOWG and may not reflect consensus throughout the group.)
>>
>>     1.  All of the documents
>>
>>     * Make clear up front:
>>     - what is in that specific document and who it is for
>>     - that there are related documents designed for other audiences,
>>     &/or that are companions or dependencies of that doc
>>     - they should first have read the introduction to WAI-ARIA and the
>>     related documents at http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria
>     I think you were reviewing the editor's draft, which doesn't have
>     the public Status of this Document section that, I believe,
>     addresses this. I also feel the introduction section of each
>     document covers this. Are there further edits we should make in
>     service of this? If so, please send specific wording suggestions.
> 
>     Public drafts:
> 
>         * http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-wai-aria-20090224/
>         * http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-wai-aria-practices-20090224/
>         * http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-wai-aria-implementation-20090224/ 
> 
>>
>>     * For consistency with other WAI specs, consider the following
>>     titles/h1s:
>>     - Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 [without
>>     ‘Version’]
>     I made this change.
>>     - WAI-ARIA Primer for Accessible Rich Internet Applications 1.0
>>     - WAI-ARIA Best Practices for Accessible Rich Internet
>>     Applications 1.0
>>     - WAI-ARIA User Agent Implementation Guide for Accessible Rich
>>     Internet Applications 1.0
>>     - WAI-ARIA Roadmap for Accessible Rich Internet Applications 1.0
>>     [or no 1.0 needed?]
>     I think this is super-awkward. This is kind of like saying "WAI-ARIA
>     Best Practices for WAI-ARIA". I also don't see that this change
>     would make it more consistent with other WAI specs. The other
>     editors agreed that we don't want to make these title changes.
>>
>>     * For documents that are informative (rather than normative
>>     standards/specs), make that clear.
>     This is addressed in the status of this document (again, an editors
>     draft issue).
>>
>>     * <a>ARIA Overview</a> should be <a>WAI-ARIA Overview</a>
>     I'm unclear if /all/ instances of ARIA should be presented as
>     "WAI-ARIA". My personal preference is to do "WAI-ARIA" on first use
>     in a section and plain "ARIA" after that. I believe you're
>     requesting that all instances be the long form, but I'm not clear.
>     It's actually easier just to find-replace it all to long form than
>     to decide when to do long and when to do short, but I don't know if
>     that's best for readability.
>>
>>     * Explain jargon like "user agent" on first use. Link terms to
>>     their definitions in the glossary. Make sure acronyms are written
>>     out in first use.
>     I did a massive linking of terms, and wrapping <abbr> around
>     everything I could think of, which I hope addresses this request. I
>     actually think I may have overdone it, but it was with the
>     expectation that it's easier to pull back than to go through another
>     pass to add. I welcome feedback about the appropriate amount of term
>     links and <abbr> markup.
>>
>>     * Consider using the CSS as is in /TR/WCAG/, especially for the
>>     links to the definitions
>     We will take a look at this with a goal to adopting some of the
>     styles from WCAG 2.0.
>>
>>     * add [contents] link at the top, e.g., like /TR/WCAG/
>     This is done.
>>
>>     * include link to public comments list in the Status section (or
>>     wherever else appropriate)
>     Standard for public status; editorial draft issue again.
>>
>>     2. WAI-ARIA 1.0 Editor's Draft <http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/>
>>
>>     * In "This section is informative" link "informative" to
>>     definition and un-italicize.
>     Done. I linked normative and informative to a glossary entry. I used
>     a "termref" class which is styled to look how older WCAG drafts did
>     it. The style for that class may be updated in addressing the above
>     CSS request.
>>
>>     * Change "Semantics are knowledge of" to "Semantics is the
>>     knowledge of..."
>     Done
>>
>>     3. WAI-ARIA Best Practices
>>     <http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/ />
>>
>>     "Writing rich internet applications is much more difficult than
>>     righting in HTML. It is even more work to ensure your application
>>     runs in multiple browsers and support WAI-ARIA."
>>     is pretty strong. Please reconsider wording. This could be taken
>>     out of context and used to say that the main point is that ARIA is
>>     really hard, instead of how awesome it is to the user.
>     I'll happily take wording suggestions. I did nothing yet.
>>
>>     Note that some EOWG participants were somewhat uncomfortable
>>     telling people so strongly to use toolkits. (more on this is in a
>>     separate email)
>     We have agreed that we will make this change, but I can't promise
>     when it will show up in a draft.
>>
>>     (also typo "righting" and “support”)
>     done
>>
>>     ###
>>
>>     Regards,
>>     ~Shawn for EOWG <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/>
>>
>>
>>     ------------------
>>     Shawn Lawton Henry
>>     W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
>>     e-mail: shawn@w3.org
>>     phone: +1.617.395.7664
>>     about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/
>>
>>
> 
>     -- 
> 
>     Michael Cooper
>     Web Accessibility Specialist
>     World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
>     E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org>
>     Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>
> 
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 20:23:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:57 UTC