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


From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:44:13 -0400
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-id: <002a01c24ea1$60f64a50$210a640a@GV6101>
Sorry to be slow in posting but had to get all this straightened out.





In trying to resolve overlaps between checkpoints 1.3, 3.1 and 4.1, the
working group on the August 22 teleconference came to the conclusion
that all of the ideas and concepts of 3.1 were covered either by 1.3 or


Basically, the concepts either had to do with making sure that any
structure that existed in a document was programmatically exposed (ala
1.3) or it dealt with adding structure to the document wherever it was
appropriate in order to make it more understandable (ala 4.1).


For a while, there was a question as to whether or not it was suggesting
that structure should be added in order to make the document more
navigable.  However, closer examination revealed that it did not make
sense to add structure to a document where there was no logical
structure in order to make it more navigable (e.g. you wouldn't
arbitrarily insert chapters into something where there were no logical
chapters).  If there were logical chapters, then they would be added
because it makes it easier to understand and you would programmatically
expose them so that they could also be used to navigate.  


The group, therefore, proposes eliminating checkpoint 3.1 and making
some editorial changes to 1.3 and 4.1.  Below are the new proposed 1.3
and 4.1 checkpoints, the text which has been moved from 3.1 is shown in
square brackets and is also blue in color.  


[Begin Proposed Checkpoint 1.3 Revisions]


Checkpoint 1.3 Make all content and structure available independently of



Success criteria


You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.3 at the Minimum Level if:


    1. any information that is conveyed through presentation formatting

       is also provided in either text or structure.

    2. the following can be derived programmatically (i.e. through

       assistive technology compatible markup or data model) from the

       content without interpreting presentation.

         a. any hierarchical elements and relationships, such as

            headings, paragraphs and lists

         b. any non-hierarchical relationships between elements such as

            cross-references and linkages, associations between labels

            and controls, associations between cells and their headers,


         c. Any relationships expressed spatially would be exposed 

            programmatically. (e.g. tables used for layout)

         d. any emphasis


You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.3 at Level 2 if:


1.    [diagrams that have structure can be accessed by the user.]


You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.3 at Level 3 if:


     * (presently no additional criteria for this level.)


The following are additional ideas for enhancing a site along this

particular dimension:


     * (presently no additional criteria for this level.)


Definitions (informative)


   Content is the information or meaning and function.


   Presentation is the rendering of the content and structure in a form

   that can be sensed by the user.


   Structure includes both hierarchical structure of the content and

   non-hierarchical relationships such as cross-references, or the

   correspondence between header and data cells in a table.



Benefits (informative)


     * Separating content and structure from presentation allows Web

       pages to be presented differently to meet the needs and

       constraints of different users without losing any of the

       information or structure. For example, information can be

       presented via speech or braille (text) that was originally

       intended to be presented visually.


Examples (informative)


     * Example 1: a multi-column document.

       A document is marked up with headings, paragraphs and other

       structural features. It is presented visually in three columns.

       The markup that creates the columns is separate from the markup

       that specifies the logical structure of the document.

     * Example 2: a scrolling list of stock prices.

       Current stock quotes are scrolled horizontally across the screen.

       The data are separate from the methods used to scroll the text

       across the page.

     * Example 3: a 3-dimensional site map.

       A custom user interface renders 3D visualizations of the pages on

       a site and how they relate to one another from a data source. Any

       hierarchical relationships, groupings, cross-references, etc.

       would originate in the data source so that alternate interfaces

       could be rendered (from the same source) that expose the

       of the site in an accessible form. (See also checkpoint 5.4)

     * Example 4: a list that allows users to sort information on a page

       according to preference.

       A script allows a user to rearrange a categorical listing of

       files by date, artist, genre, or file size. The script updates

       both the structure and the presentation accordingly when

       generating alternate views.


[End Proposed Checkpoint 1.3 Revisions]



[Begin Proposed Checkpoint 4.1 Revisions]


Checkpoint 4.1 Write as clearly and simply as is [appropriate /

for the purpose of the content.


   Reviewer's Note: This item is under discussion. There is consensus

   the existence of the checkpoint but not for the form of the success

   criteria. We do not therefore have something for the draft at this

   time. There is a list below of items that are being explored for

   inclusion either as success criteria or as Advisory Recommendations.

   We are also compiling a longer list (approx 50 items) of different

   ideas that relate to this checkpoint.


   This checkpoint is very difficult and the group is wrestling with a

   number of problems. Among them:

    1. It is very difficult to determine what makes writing clear and

       simple for all topics.

    2. Some content is derived from other sources and is copyrighted so

       it cannot be altered.

    3. Some materials or topics cannot be communicated accurately in

       simple language.

    4. There are some cases where the form is specific to the intent,

       (poetry, exposition )

    5. Since some people can not understand the content no matter how

       simply it is written, it is not possible to make any content

       accessible to everyone. Therefore, we are having difficulty

       finding specific objective criteria that could be applied across

       all types of content and sites.


   Comments, suggestions and contributions to the discussion and work on

   this topic are also solicited. Refer to the issues list for more



Success criteria


You will have successfully met Checkpoint 4.1 at the Minimum Level if:


     * (still under construction.)


You will have successfully met Checkpoint 4.1 at Level 2 if:


     * (still under construction.)


You will have successfully met Checkpoint 4.1 at Level 3 if:


     * (still under construction.)


The following are additional ideas for enhancing a site along this

particular dimension:


     * (still under construction.)


Partial list of items being explored for inclusion as success criteria

advisory recommendations


    1. content under site control is written as clearly and simply as

       author feels [appropriate / possible] for the purpose of the


    2. a statement is provided on the site which asserts that those

       responsible for the site have reviewed the materials on the site

       and the content under their control is written as clearly and

       simply as they feel is [appropriate / possible] for the purpose

       the content.

    3. summaries and/or simpler forms are provided for key pages or

       sections of the site.

    4. provide an outline or a summary for your document.

    5. break up long paragraphs into shorter ones, with one idea per


    6. break up long sentences into shorter ones.

    7. provide accurate unique page titles.

    8. ensure that headings and link text are unique and that they make

       sense when read out of context.

    9. provide definitions for any jargon or specialized terminology

       in your document.

   10. provide explanations of figurative, metaphorical, or idiomatic

       uses of language (for example, 'haven't seen you in a coons age'

       or 'the sight tore my heart out').

   11. language should be used that your intended audience ought to be

       familiar with.

   12. when introducing new concepts or terms, they should be defined or

       annotated in language that the audience is expected to be

       with, or definitions or explanations should be linked to that

       might be easier to understand.

  [13. diagrams are constructed in a fashion so that they have

  [14. break up text into logical paragraphs.]

  [14. provide hierarchical sections and titles, particularly for longer


  [15. reveal important non-hierarchical relationships, such as

       cross-references, or the correspondence between header and data

       cells in a table, so that they are represented unambiguously in

       the markup or data model.

  [16. divide very large works into sections and or chapters with



[Definitions (informative)


   The structure of content represents changes in context. For example,

    1. A book is divided into chapters, paragraphs, lists, etc. Chapter

       titles help the reader anticipate the meaning of the following

       paragraphs. Lists clearly indicate separate, yet related ideas.

       All of these divisions help the reader anticipate changes in


    2. A bicycle is divided into wheels and a frame. Further, a wheel is

       divided into a tire and a rim. In an image of the bicycle, one

       group of circles and lines becomes "wheel" while another group

       becomes "frame."]



Benefits (informative)


     * All users, especially those with cognitive, learning, and/or

       reading disabilities benefit from the use of clear and simple

       writing. This should not discourage you from expressing complex

       technical ideas.

     * Using clear and simple language also benefits people whose first

       language differs from your own, including those people who

       communicate primarily in sign language.


   [When the logical structure is provided in markup or a data model,

     * Users with physical disabilities can use structure to more easily

       jump between paragraphs, chapters, sections etc.

     * Users with cognitive disabilities can use structure (chapter

       titles, headers, etc.) to provide more context for the text that

       follows them. They also provide warning of a change in context

       reorient the user to the new focus.

     * Users with blindness or low vision can jump from header to header

       to get an overview or to more quickly "skim" to the section they

       are interested in.

     * Readers with low vision can sometimes (depending on display

       technology) change how chapter titles and headers are displayed

       make them more visible -and easier to use when skimming the


     * the content can be presented on a variety of devices because the

       device software can choose only those elements of the content

       it is able to display and display them in the most effective way

       for that device.]


[Examples (informative)


     * Example 1: a physics dissertation.

       A dissertation contains well-defined sections such as "Abstract,"

       "Table of Contents," "Chapter 1," etc. The pieces in each section

       (paragraphs, subheadings, quotes) are denoted with structural


     * Example 2: a scalable image of a bicycle.

       Lines and a circle (spokes and rim) are grouped into a "wheel."

       Lines in a triangle that attach to each wheel are grouped into a


     * Example 3: user interface.

       User interface controls are divided into organized groups.]


[End Proposed Checkpoint 4.1 Revisions]



An additional proposal from the Aug. 22 telecon related to the removal
of checkpoint 3.1 was that the following success criteria: 


[information is provided that would allow an assistive technology to
determine at least one logical, linear reading order]


be moved to proposed checkpoint 1.4 [was 3.2], at level 2. See Moving
Checkpoint 3.2 to Guideline 1 to Become New 1.4
for details.


Comments are solicited.







-- ------------------------------ 

Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 

Professor - Human Factors 

Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.

Director - Trace R & D Center 

University of Wisconsin-Madison 

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


Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2002 10:44:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:20 GMT