W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > August 1999

Re: intro

From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 12:05:40 -0400
Message-ID: <00bb01bedf5c$5d6afaf0$b040968e@ic.utoronto.ca>
To: <love26@gorge.net>, <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
William,

I like your intro. Here's my suggested changes:

> The WAI has produced a foundation Recommendation, the WCAG, upon which
> are based working drafts of what it is hoped will become further
> Recommendations: one for User Agents; another for Authoring Tools.
>
The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) produced a foundation document, The
WAI Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines, that describes what must be done to make an HTML
page accessible to all. Two working draft recommendation papers were
produced, based on these WAI guidelines; one for user agents; another for
authoring tools.

> These documents try to make clear the parameters essential to a Web that
> enables "everything, everyone connected", especially Persons With
> Disabilities.
>
The draft recommendation papers try to make clear that the WWW should enable
everyone, especially those with disabilities.

> In order for an author or user of materials on the Web to determine if a
> particular site is likely to be accessible to PWDs, it is important to
> have some functional, friendly, and free tools for site evaluation and,
> if possible, repair of problems that may be uncovered.
>
To determine if a web site is accessible to everyone, it is important to
have functional, friendly and free tools for site evaluation and, if
possible, repair of problems that may be uncovered.

> To this end we are developing guidelines for such Evaluation & Repair
> Tools - sort of "Guidelines for the Guidelines." Although these are
> meant to be used by those who would create tools, they may prove useful
> to anyone interested in an accessible Web.
>
This document describes techniques that may be used by such 'evaluation and
repair' tools to uncover accessibility problems and possibly repair them.
These guidelines may be used by those who create web authoring tools or to
anyone interested in creating accessible web documents.

> The most important aspect of any such tools is that they be themselves
> accessible. Since many people trying to use them will be fairly new to
> technological matters they should be pleasant to use, not condescending
> in tone, and avoid the "cry wolf" syndrome.
>
It is important that evaluation and repair tools themselves be accessible.
Many people using these tools may be new to this technology and will require
software programs that are easy to use while not condescending in tone. Is
also important that the evaluation tool does not generate excessive warnings
or false positive accessibility errors to avoid the 'cry wolf' syndrome.

> It is clear that only a limited set of the checkpoints may be
> objectively tested by a tool. there will be much dependence on the
> user's ability to use common sense to determine conformance to the
> guidelines. To this end it is imperative that any tool have features
> that assist in reminding, without nagging; in helping, without
> demeaning; in suggesting, without demanding.
>
It is clear that only a limited set of the WAI Guideline's checkpoints may
be objectively tested by a software tool. There will still be a dependence
on the user's ability to use common sense to determine conformance to the
guidelines. It is imperative that any tool have features that assist in
reminding, without nagging; in helping, without demeaning; in suggesting,
without demanding.

We hope that the techniques in this document, implemented in software
programs, will gently guide authors along the path to more accessible
documents.

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
To: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 01, 1999 10:46 AM
Subject: intro


> I took an action item to write a proposed introduction to the document
> under discussion at the last teleconference. The document seems to be
> unavailable but here's a crude try at a first draft:
>
> * * * * * * * * * *
>
> EVALUATION AND REPAIR TOOL TIPS
>
> The WAI has produced a foundation Recommendation, the WCAG, upon which
> are based working drafts of what it is hoped will become further
> Recommendations: one for User Agents; another for Authoring Tools.
>
> These documents try to make clear the parameters essential to a Web that
> enables "everything, everyone connected", especially Persons With
> Disabilities.
>
> In order for an author or user of materials on the Web to determine if a
> particular site is likely to be accesible to PWDs, it is important to
> have some functional, friendly, and free tools for site evaluation and,
> if possible, repair of problems that may be uncovered.
>
> To this end we are developing guidelines for such Evaluation & Repair
> Tools - sort of "Guidelines for the Guidelines." Although these are
> meant to be used by those who would create tools, they may prove useful
> to anyone interested in an accessible Web.
>
> The most important aspect of any such tools is that they be themselves
> accessible. Since many people trying to use them will be fairly new to
> technological matters they should be pleasant to use, not condescending
> in tone, and avoid the "cry wolf" syndrome.
>
> It is clear that only a limited set of the checkpoints may be
> objectively tested by a tool. there will be much dependence on the
> user's ability to use common sense to determine conformance to the
> guidelines. To this end it is imperative that any tool have features
> that assist in reminding, without nagging; in helping, without
> demeaning; in suggesting, without demanding.
>
> A fairly comprehensive listing of available tools may be found at:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RC/existingtools.html which also links to other
> lists.
>
> --
> Love.
>             ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
> http://dicomp.pair.com
Received on Thursday, 5 August 1999 12:07:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:33 GMT