W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2002

Checkpoint 4.4 Review

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 00:00:24 -0600
To: "'GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002b01c1aed3$91dbfb10$67518640@laptop600>
In the telcon working sessions we all took on an item to examine.


I got 4.4  


My analysis follows.  I put the current wording at the bottom for





1 - I think the checkpoint could be worded more straightforwardly.

Checkpoint 4.4 --  Ensure that content is usable with default user agent
settings and no plug-ins. 


2 - I don't know how an author can do this since we don't specify which
user agent.  Any user agent?  All user agents?


3 - default for some user agents includes many 'plug in' like
properties.  Also style sheets are usually turned on.  (See related
comment in checkpoint text below).


4 - the success criteria is pretty good,  but should say that all the
function is preserved.  The word "content" is ambiguous to some.   Maybe
the phrase "all content and function" would work.  


5 - the success criteria is not the same as the checkpoint.  It suggests
that the checkpoint should be

Checkpoint 4.4   Ensure that all content is readable and all function
(other than artistic) is preserved when stylistic and scripting
technologies are not supported or are turned off.   

[The success criteria would then be pretty much the same as the
checkpoint.  But that isn't bad.]


6 - Example 2 needs to have some words at the end like: "while
preserving all content and functionality of the pages".   

Example 3 - the last sentence should be deleted or changed to:  "This
benefits those with older browsers and new and old assistive




Checkpoint 4.4 Ensure that content remains usable when technologies that
modify default user agent processing or behavior are turned off or not

Issue: define "default" for purposes of this checkpoint. If "default"
were taken to mean "a user agent's default rendering", then this would
defeat the purpose of the checkpoint, because (for many user agents) the
default is to apply style sheets, invoke scripts and programmatic
objects, etc. 

Success criteria 

You will have successfully ensured that content remains usable when
technologies that modify default user agent processing or behavior are
turned off or not supported if:

*	for technologies that associate presentation with structure, the
content is still usable and readable by the user even if stylistic or
scripting technologies are not supported or turned off. 

Examples (informative) 

*	Example 1: Metadata.
A scalable image of the layout of a network uses metadata to label each
piece of the network and how they connect to each other. The metadata
can be used to create a text description of the network. 
*	Example 2: A transformation filter.
A Web site provides a transformation filter that allows users to design
how they will interact with the layout of the content on the site - with
or without images, with or without tables, etc. 
*	Example 3: Human resources intranet site.
The human resources department for a large company provides multiple
versions of the same content to ensure backwards compatibility with
older browsers. The IT department is not large enough to update
everyone's browsers and assistive technologies so many people make do
with older technologies. 

Benefits (informative) 

In determining the extent to which older technologies should be
supported, keep in mind that

*	assistive hardware and software are often slow to adapt to
technical advances. 
*	for significant groups of users, it may not be possible to
obtain the latest software or the hardware required to operate it. 




-- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Human Factors 
Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis. 
Director - Trace R & D Center 
Gv@trace.wisc.edu < <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>
mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, < <http://trace.wisc.edu/>
FAX 608/262-8848  
For a list of our listserves send "lists" to listproc@trace.wisc.edu <
<mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu> mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu> 


Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2002 01:00:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:40 UTC