W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: Server-Side Techniques and ATAG (was: How to ... discuss an issue (was: Re: Scripting))

From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 17:54:05 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
Cc: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>, WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, mcmay@w3.org


Yes, the border between server-side techniues and how WCAG and ATAG apply 
to them is fuzzy.  Content Management Systems (Matt's favorite topic :) is 
a good, concrete example to begin the discussion between AUWG and WCAG 
WG.  It will be interesting to hear if the AUWG talked about this 
relationship (between CMS, ATAG and WCAG) at their F2F meeting last week.

If it hasn't been done yet, it would be interesting to list all of the 
issues related to CMS, accessibility, WCAG and ATAG as a starting point for 
a discussion.  Are you interested in taking a first pass or digging up what 
has already been written?  (Matt?)

Perhaps server-side techniques could be a shared Techniques document 
between ATAG and WCAG or at least have entry points for each set of 
guidelines.  I'm not sure how that would work, but it could be something to 
consider. We've discussed joint telecons between AUWG and WCAG WG, although 
a particular date and time for a discussion has not been scheduled. Once we 
do schedule a discussion,  this topic ought to be on the agenda.

I've created issue #309 as a placeholder for this topic [1].


[1] http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=309

At 04:51 PM 6/16/2003, Kynn Bartlett wrote:

>FWIW, server-side scripting techniques would seem to fall somewhere
>between both the WCAG working group and the ATAG working group.  There
>is a fuzzy border between "a server-side process that promotes
>accessibility" and "an application on the server which is generating
>accessible content."
>I think this is a case where both groups need to have input and
>if just to know where the borders begin and end.  (For example, to what
>degree do server-side techniques to satisfy WCAG have to comply with
>ATAG?  At some point, this will be true -- say, a content management
>system a la Edapta [RIP] but it's not always true for something like
>mod_accessibility.  This is a good topic for cross-group perspectives.)
>On Monday, June 16, 2003, at 11:55 AM, Wendy A Chisholm wrote:
>>If you would like the WCAG WG to discuss a specific issue,
>>1. check if the issue is already in the issues list
>>links to condensed bug report lists:
>>we have 4 open issues related to client-side scripting:
>>http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/condensedreports/ clientside_issues.php
>>2.  If your issue is not on the issues list
>>create a new issue in the WCAG Bugzilla database
>>3. Propose a solution to the issue and send it to the mailing list
>>For example, refer to this message from Michael Cooper about using the
>>summary attribute on Table elements.  He summarizes the possibilities
>>and proposes a solution.
>>Another good example:
>>summarize the issue and raise questions that we need to answer about a
>>particular technique:
>>While scripting issues have not been the core of our discussions, we
>>have been making progress. Here is an overview of what's been
>>happening with Techniques for WCAG 2.0
>>1. updating issues lists.
>>all previous HTML issues have been moved to bugzilla
>>2. discussing open issues on Wednesday telecons and mailing list
>>primarily addressing HTML issues, summary of those discussed in the
>>last few weeks:
>>- tables
>>- alt/title/longdesc
>>- abbr/acronym
>>3. designing schema and tools for techniques
>>4. converting old html techniques to new dtd
>>Loretta is doing this. She is also converting the PDF Techniques to
>>the new dtd
>>At 11:11 AM 6/14/2003, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:
>>>The regular annual wake for:
>>>"Client-side Scripting Techniques for Web Content Accessibility
>>>Guidelines 2.0"
>>>is fast approaching.
>>>Please can anyone advise me in what sense is WCAG fulfilling it scope
>>>with respect to scripting?
>>>other W3C technologies?
>>>enabling people with a severe learning difficulty to browse the web
>>>Congratulations on the working group logo 'b-10-family1.png' though
>>>this is perhaps not ideal as a name, how about 'working group
>>>Sorry not to have contributed more, perhaps its time I rejoined as an
>>>active participant.
>>wendy a chisholm
>>world wide web consortium
>>web accessibility initiative
>Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>                     http://kynn.com
>Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain                http://idyllmtn.com
>Author, CSS in 24 Hours                       http://cssin24hours.com
>Inland Anti-Empire Blog                      http://blog.kynn.com/iae
>Shock & Awe Blog                           http://blog.kynn.com/shock
>Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>                     http://kynn.com
>Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain                http://idyllmtn.com
>Author, CSS in 24 Hours                       http://cssin24hours.com
>Inland Anti-Empire Blog                      http://blog.kynn.com/iae
>Shock & Awe Blog                           http://blog.kynn.com/shock

wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
Received on Monday, 16 June 2003 17:55:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:44 UTC