- From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 13:15:45 -0500
- To: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Len, no. not a typo. In the rough reformulation I broadened it a bit. I think that "navigating" a document is parallel to "interacting" with an application. We need to cover both documents and applications (and combinations thereof). Therefore, for a user to interact with it according to their preferences, it needs to be device independent. I do not see a conflict between the two statements. Make sense? --w At 12:53 PM 1/4/01 , Leonard R. Kasday wrote: >Is there a typo here? You say > >>" Guideline 2 should say, "Design content that can be navigated and >> presented according to the needs and preferences of the user." > > >But under "rough reformulation" Guideline 2 is "device independence" > > >Len > > > >At 11:02 AM 1/4/01 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >>The proposal works for me. >> >>Charles McCN >> >>On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Wendy A Chisholm wrote: >> >> Happy New Year! >> >> This e-mail contains some reasoning about why, how, and where I ended >> up at >> a proposal for trimming our draft to 3 guidelines. At the end is a 2 >> question questionnaire that I would appreciate responses to. >> >> There were several proposals about how to reword Guideline 2, as well as a >> couple threads about the myth of separating content from >> presentation. I've been trying to synthesize all of this information into >> the new draft. >> >> Another aspect I've been considering is ensuring that we answer the "who, >> what , why, where, how" questions. >> >> If we look at Guideline 1, I think it generally states "what needs to be >> done." The checkpoints under Guideline 1 state "how to do it" and the >> explanatory text of the checkpoints elaborate on the "how" as well as "why >> do it" and "what it means." The techniques will further describe "how to >> do it" at a technology-specific level. >> >> Therefore, in looking at Guideline 2 it currently reads: "Separate >> content >> and structure from presentation." This sounds more like a "how" than a >> "what." I am also concerned about the myth of separating presentation >> from >> semantics, but I won't discuss that here. I want to focus on the >> mechanics >> of the document. >> >> We are also trying to create something that is easy to understand by >> less-technical or non-technical people. >> >> With all of this in mind, it seems that Guideline 2 should describe what >> needs to happen to make the structure accessible. >> >> The checkpoints describe how: >> 1. Use markup languages according to specification >> 2. Use style languages to control layout and presentation. >> 3. Use markup or a data model to provide the logical structure of content. >> >> What do these things accomplish? We are asking the designer to expose the >> structure of the document. What is structure? Structure primarily >> describes relationships between different size "chunks" such as a heading >> to a paragraph, n number of chunks that make up a chapter. Hierarchy. >> >> The "what" is that we need to know the logical order in which to navigate >> the relationships of the document or application. >> >> While Guideline 1 says, "Design content that can be presented visually, >> auditorily or tactually, according to the needs and preferences of the >> user." Guideline 2 should say, "Design content that can be navigated and >> presented according to the needs and preferences of the user." >> >> Checkpoint 2.2 really falls under Guideline 1. In fact, I think >> everything >> can fall into 3 basic categories: >> >> Guideline 1: Presentation (combine with parts of 5 - device independence, >> and 6 - graceful transformation) >> Guideline 2: Interaction (combine with 4 - browsing and navigation and >> parts of 5) >> Guideline 3: Comprehension >> >> In a sense this is separating presentation from structure, behavior, and >> content along the lines of the Model/View/Controller paradigm. >> >> Therefore, here is a rough reformulation of WCAG 2.0. I have combined >> some >> of our existing checkpoints, subsumed others. I have not made a map >> between them. The checkpoints are probably not technically complete. The >> idea is to test the new structure not determine if the wording of each >> checkpoint is exactly as it should be. If the structure seems ok, then I >> propose to take another pass at wording, adding back the examples and >> rationales. This is just a sweep to look at the mechanics and >> structure of >> our document. >> >> Guideline 1. Graceful transformation. Design content that can be presented >> visually, auditorally, or tactually, according to the needs and >> preferences >> of the user. >> >> checkpoints: >> 1.1. Provide a text equivalent for all non-text content >> 1.2. Synchronize text equivalents with multimedia presentations >> (captions). >> 1.3. Synchronize a description of essential visual info with multimedia >> presentations (auditory descriptions). >> 1.4 Use style languages to control layout and presentation (create for >> specific devices if able). >> 1.5 Ensure that content transforms gracefully (no matter what technology >> the user has or doesn't have, they are able to interact with your content) >> >> Guideline 2. Device independence. Design content that can be interacted >> with without a mouse, only with a keyboard, only through voice, without >> voice, or with or without other devices, according to the needs and >> preferences of the user. >> >> checkpoints: >> 2.1 Use markup languages according to specification. >> 2.2 Use markup or a data model to provide the logical structure of >> content. >> 2.3 Minimize the use of or give the user control of content that may >> interfere with their ability to focus (animations, blinking text, >> scrolling >> banners, etc.) >> 2.4 Give the user control of mechanisms that cause extreme changes in >> context >> 2.5 Provide consistent interaction behaviors (navigation mechanisms, >> interface controls) >> 2.6 Provide various search options >> 2.7 Give users control over how long they can spend reading or interacting >> with content. >> 2.8 Use device independent event handlers >> 2.9 Design assistive-technology compatible user interfaces >> >> Guideline 3. Comprehension. Design content that is easy to understand. >> >> checkpoints: >> 3.1 Use consistent presentation >> 3.2 Emphasize structure through presentation, positioning and labels >> 3.3 Divide information into smaller, more manageable chucnks >> 3.4 Write clearly and simply >> 3.5 Use graphics to illustrate concepts >> 3.6 Summarize complex information >> 3.7 Define key terms, abbreviations, acronyms, and specialized language >> >> >> Please complete the following questionnaire: >> Question 1: Does this proposal oversimplify the guidelines, creating >> something that is too general to understand? >> yes __ >> no __ >> >> Question 2: should we proceed with a trimmed down structure similar to the >> one proposed in this e-mail in the next draft? >> yes __ >> no __ >> >> reason: >> >> </questionnaire> >> Thank you, >> --wendy >> -- >> wendy a chisholm >> world wide web consortium >> web accessibility initiative >> madison, wi usa >> tel: +1 608 663 6346 >> /-- >> >> >>-- >>Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 >>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI >>Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia >>until 6 January 2001 at: >>W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, >>France > >-- >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/ -- wendy a chisholm world wide web consortium web accessibility initiative madison, wi usa tel: +1 608 663 6346 /--
Received on Thursday, 4 January 2001 13:11:51 UTC