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

RE: Questions from Face to Face

From: Bob Regan <bregan@macromedia.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 23:18:33 -0800
Message-ID: <5DB489EF44C5444A9974E3E934CD834C01B2EE1B@ex-600town-03.macromedia.com>
To: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I don't know that I explained the purpose of the list well enough. 

The goal here is not to ask what some may see as 'obvious' questions, but to try to identify them. The issue came up in the face to face that several of the guidelines, when read for the first time, lead to these obvious questions. 

To the extent possible, we want the guidelines to answer the questions themselves. This will help to clarify the document, especially for novices or those new to accessibility. 

Cheers,
Bob

____________________________
 
Bob Regan
Senoir Product Manager for Accessibility
Macromedia
1025 Emerald Street 
Madison, WI 53715 
608.239.8160 (mobile)
 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:59 PM
>To: Joe Clark
>Cc: WAI-GL
>Subject: Re: Questions from Face to Face
>
>Most of Joe's stuff I agree with as is and so have removed. On a few
>poiints
>I have made some further comments, interspersed
>
>chaals
>
>On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Joe Clark wrote:
>
>  >>* Guideline 1 - Perceivable
>  >>o Checkpoint 1.1 Provide a text equivalent for all non-text content.
>[snip]
>  >  * Does this require a text equivalent for every QT movie, Flash
>  >element or PDF it they meet Guideline 5?
>
>  Inside <object>, probably. (Just a functional equivalent will do
>  there: "Star Wars trailer.") Inside <embed>, probably not, though I
>  suppose you could use title="".
>
>Presumably similar kinds of content are added to a page using object and
>embed elements - it is more a case of where you rate standardisation in
>importance than a difference in what kind of content is being provided.
>
>(the technical details for embed are that a noembed element can be
>included,
>allowing the same kind of content that would be provided inside an object
>element, but it works more like a noscript element - i.e. there isn't the
>ability to have a cascade of content, as I understand the element. I note
>that I have not been able to find any specification of it for about 3
>years,
>so my memory mey be faulty).
>
>  >>  o Checkpoint 1.3 Make all content and structure available
>  >>independently o f presentation.
>  >
>
>  >* Can I use the <font> tag?
>
>  In HTML variants where it is not deprecated, yes, and even when it
>  is, it's not so bad:
>
>  	<font class="v" face="Verdana" size="+1">
>  and
>  	.v { font-family: Verdana, Trebuchet, Georgia, Geneva,
>  Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px }
>
>  works in pretty much every browser since 1996.
>(and earlier, although those browsers don't necessarily provide font
>control)
>
>  >>* Guideline 2 Operable
>  >>o Checkpoint 2.1 Provide keyboard access to all functionality of
>  >>the cont ent. *
>  >
>  >Do all forms require the use of accesskey?
>
>  Unfortunately, that does seem to be the requirement as written. I
>  think it's too strong.
>
>I agree that such a requirement is too strong, and not necessarily helpful.
>
>  >  * Do all controls of technologies other than XML applications
>  >require s hortcut keys? i.e. does the play button of a video player
>  >require a shortcut ke y?
>
>  Yes, definitely.
>
>well, a keyboard acticvation method, which might be something slightly
>different, but I agree. Also for things that are XML applications.
>
>  >>* Guideline 3 - Orientation/Navigation
>  >>o Checkpoint 3.1 Provide structure within content.
>  >
>  >* Do all HTML pages require use of <h1> through <h6> elements?
>
>  No, just valid markup. <p></p> is structural. So is <input> or
>  <samp>. It all depends.
>
>In general, one or more heading elements are useful in an HTML page.
>Although
>p elements are structural elements, using differently formatted p elements
>to
>identify titles or subheadings, items in a list, and so on, (as
>unfortunately
>done by many current and most obsolete authoring tools) would be breaking
>this checkpint. But as Joe says, It depends.
>
>  >>  o Checkpoint 3.2 Emphasize structure through presentation(s),
>  >>positioning , and labels.
>  >
>  >* Do all heading elements have to be formatting differently? i.e
>  >does < h3> have to be different <h4> in HTML?
>
>  A CSS question. No, they don't. I cover this in my forthcoming book.
>
>In terms of distinguishing the levels, it is helpful if they are.
>
>  >>o Checkpoint 4.4 Identify the primary natural language of text and
>  >>text e quivalents and all changes in natural language.
>  >
>  >* What about phrases that have coopted by the primary language? For
>  >exa mple the City of Prarie du Chien in Wisconsin, U.S. is not
>  >pronounced in French .
>
>  But it isn't a French word anymore (tennis and rendezvous aren't,
>  either). Sushi isn't a Japanese word anymore. Loanwords are clearly
>  exempt, and arguably proper names should always be exempt.
>
>I agree with what Joe says. Maybe we should clarify further the point -
>that
>this is for pronunciation, translation (including simplification by
>auto-translation), and braille contraction to be done correctly.
>
>An intersting issue arises in connection with teh discussion of how to do
>quotes in other languages. In an english text, where there is a passage of
>dialogue in french, the normal thing to do would be to use english dialogue
>presentation style, but if the dialogue is marked as french then a browser
>would normally apply french style for that section (I think, depending on
>how
>the markup is done). I will follow this up further. But it is an edge case
>for most users in monolingual countries.
>
>  >>* Guideline 5 - Pot Luck
>
>  >>  o Checkpoint 5.2 Ensure that content remains usable when
>  >>technologies tha t modify default user agent processing or behavior
>  >>are turned off or not suppor ted.
>  >
>  >* Does that mean every element that is not written as an XML
>  >applicatio n must have a text equivalent?
>
>No, it means that any kind of technology beyond the (still undetermined)
>baseline must not be relied on for use of a page or site. (which is also
>relevant for the question of "what technologies are accessible?")
>
>chaals
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 02:19:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:18 GMT