W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > January 2001

Re: Tracking Manual Checks

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:56:20 -0500 (EST)
To: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
cc: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0101291151210.18891-100000@tux.w3.org>
I guess you are looking for something like 4.4 Provide the author with a
summary of the document's accessibility status. [Priority3] The effective
requirement is probably close to what you are looking for, although you may
be considering explaining to AU why this actually qualifies as more than
beneficial - removing a significant barrier to accessibility, and thereby
justifying a change in priority.

I agree that EARL is a good format for recording this information in a very
useful format. One of the reasons I asked for AU to be invited to the
morning meeting of ER on the thursday of the plenary.

Cheers

Charles

On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Leonard R. Kasday wrote:

  Per my action item from today...

  I checked the AU document, especially the section on evaluating
  accessibility [1] and did not see the requirement we discussed today, to wit:

  Provide means to record the results of manual checks of a document.  This
  enables the author to avoid performing those checks again.

  - The manual check results should reference the particular parts of the
  document to which they apply.
  - If the document changes, the results document should be updated, but only
  to the extent it's actually impacted by the changes in the document.  For
  example, manual checks of ALT text on an image should not be affected if
  HTML text changes elsewhere.   It may be most convenient to implement this
  feature in object oriented architectures, where each object (e.g. an image
  tag) is responsible for tracking manual accessibility decisions relevent to
  itself.
  - A possible format for recording the accessibility decisions is that being
  developed in the EARL activity of ER [2]

  If we have consensus within ER on this proposal, I'll send it to AU for
  their consideration.

  Len

  p.s.
  I said  "manual checks of ALT text on an image should not be affected if
  HTML text changes elsewhere"
  Hmmm.  Are there actually cases where ALT text would depend on context?

  [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/WD-ATAG10-TECHS-20000918/#gl-identify-markup
  [2] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/#earl
  --
  Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
  Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple
  University
  (215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
  http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday         mailto:kasday@acm.org

  Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
  http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/

  The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant:
  http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/


-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Monday, 29 January 2001 11:56:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:38 GMT