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

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

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:43:49 -0500
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Cc: Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org, cooper@w3.org, public-pfwg-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <20090305214349.GD14044@sonata.rednote.net>
Shawn Henry writes:
> We use "WAI-ARIA" as the acronym to avoid trademark issues.


May we know what conflicts potentially concern us?
Are there other, pre-existing uses of the term 'aria' in web technology space?

Janina

>
> 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/>
>>

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.202.595.7777;
		sip:janina@CapitalAccessibility.Com
Partner, Capital Accessibility LLC	http://CapitalAccessibility.Com

Marketing the Owasys 22C talking screenless cell phone in the U.S. and Canada
Learn more at http://ScreenlessPhone.Com

Chair, Open Accessibility	janina@a11y.org	
Linux Foundation		http://a11y.org
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 21:44:30 UTC

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