W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: Updated: DRAFT - Checkpoints for HTML, XML, SMIL, CSS, SVG, and XHTML

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 14:59:37 +1000 (EST)
To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10006071446410.10605-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
This draft is starting to take shape well.


1. Combine HTML and CSS as they are so often used together (this was
discussed at last week's meeting).

2. Should frames count as auditory/visual content for which an alternative
is needed? The requirement is that frame layout be explained to facilitate
navigation of the content. This probably shouldn't be subsumed under
checkpoint 1.1.

3. With respect to the XHTML requirements, how many of these are simply
needed to ensure validity, and how many are truly access-related? Consider
combining HTML and XHTML, noting their differences where relevant, instead
of creating two lists of checkpoints.

The resultant checklists would, in outline, be as follows:

1. The HTML/XHTML/CSS checklist, characterizing the requirements common to
these formats when used with CSS as tye style language.

2. Extensibility checklist: reuse of access-related components from XHTML
and other languages, discussion of modularization and the design of new
markup languages.

3. SMIL checklist.

4. SVG checklist.

5. User interface checklist: either one checklist, treating both DOM and
HTML forms; or two checklists, one covering DOM (scripts etc.) and the
other discussing forms.

6. XSL could be included in 1, 2, and 4, possibly in 3 as well. Authors
are able to choose between CSS and XSL, though the latter is likely to be
used in connection with the XML-based formats rather than with HTML.

Other checklists may be needed, but the foregoing, perhaps, provides a
suitable starting point.
Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2000 01:00:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:32 UTC