W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: Bug 774 - Alternatives for word 'page'

From: Doyle-Work <dburnett@sesa.org>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 14:02:15 -0800
To: W3C Web Content <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BCC7DEE7.2A47%dburnett@sesa.org>
Hello Yvette and All -

By no means will I be a hold out but I do have some concerns about the word
page and its possible replacement (resource or whatever we come up with in
the end).  

In your definition, large resource was defined as: ³large resource: Web
resources can either be perceived as a single document or as a document
collection. A resource is considered large when it contains more than 50,000
words for a single document or over 50 documents for a document collection².

When I think of documents, I think of a single resource only, especially if
we¹re using the word resource to replace the present word  ³page².    In my
mind, 50 documents as per above would be 50 resources.  Could a resource be
considered large if it contained limited words (or none) and a huge file (a
video clip, for example)?

If URI (Uniform Resource Identifier) is a specific address for the location
of a resource, isn¹t the resource then the last ³thing² in the address
string.  For example: http://www.sesa.org/blah/blah2/blah3/etc.html where
etc.html would be the resource or page.

I see a series of documents being the same as a series of resources.  My
question is ­ is a single resource the same as a single document?  Is there
any difference?  By all means, I am really confused now.

I did run some of your new wording by one of my colleagues (it was given out
of context, by the way) and he fully understood the older wording which used
page but was puzzled by the word resource.  He explained and I believe
rightfully so, all of his web development manuals and third party reference
materials make use of the word page or document.

Like I said, this is by no means a make it or break it issue for me but an
issue that I feel will be confusing to others.  Let¹s face it, a huge
percentage of web authors will be/are using web authoring tools right out of
the box and they have no clue about the ³stuff² under the hood.  If we
change our terminology, we need to be sure that the same is being looked at
from the authoring tools perspective.

My thoughts ­ thank you for all of you hard work.
> 


On 5/12/04 12:29 PM, "Yvette P. Hoitink" <y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>  
> During the last telecon, I took an action item to evaluate the use of the word
> 'page' throughout our current working draft. I have limited this discussion to
> occurrences of the word 'page' in guideline text and success criteria. I have
> reviewed the occurrence of the word 'page' in the examples, notes and
> definitions and have not found any problems since a web page is a good example
> in most cases and doesn't need to be generalized for other techniques. For
> several of the examples, we could do with some examples from other
> technologies than HTML but that's a general problem that's not related to the
> use of the word 'page'.
>  
> I have been able to come up with formulations that don't use the word 'page'
> for every instance of the word 'page' in guideline text or success criteria.
> Some of them may have lost something in clarity though.
> Guideline 2.4 level 2, SC 2
> Current wording
> In documents greater than 50,000 words or sites larger than 50 perceived
> pages, at least one of the following is provided:
> A. hierarchical structure,
> B. table of contents (for pages) or site map (for sites),
> C. alternate display order (for pages) or alternate site navigation mechanisms
> (for sites)
> Discussion
> This whole success criteria presupposes a traditional website. I think we
> should abstract from the distinction between pages and websites and
> reformulate this SC in more general terms that are applicable to both. This
> would make the SC applicable to other types of web content like voice XML or
> SVG. The techniques documents would work out the specifics of how to apply
> this SC to each technology. I think the whole succes criterion needs
> reformulating with the broader context in mind, it's not just a matter of
> substituting the word 'page'.
> Proposed wording
> In #large resources#, at least one of the following is provided:
> A. hierarchical structure
> B. table of contents, for example a site map
> C. alternate site navigation mechanisms that allow the user to determine the
> order in which to navigate the resource.
>  
> Definition:
> large resource:
> Web resources can either be perceived as a single document or as a document
> collection. A resource is considered large when it contains more than 50,000
> words for a single document or over 50 documents for a document collection.
>  
> site navigation mechanism:
> A site navigation mechanism is a mechanism for easily orienting and moving
> about within the site. Site navigation mechanisms include but are not limited
> to:
> * A home page with hyperlinks on it and subsequent pages that link to the
> other pages at the site
> * site map(s) 
> * search engine(s)
> * expanding outline(s)
> * alternate display order(s) of the content
> * dynamic fisheye views showing all linked pages or topics related to any
> page. 
> * 3-D virtual representations of site content
> Guideline 2.4, level 2, SC 3
> Current wording
> Large blocks of material that are repeated on multiple pages, such as
> navigation menus with more than 8 or more links, can be bypassed by people who
> use screen readers or who navigate via keyboard or keyboard interface.
> Discussion
> The word 'page' can be easily avoided here by substituting it for 'place
> within the resource'. As a side effect, this guideline now becomes applicable
> to repeated links on the same page as well which I think is good. Aditionally,
> I have edited the 'more than 8 or more' error.
> Proposed wording
> Large blocks of material that are repeated in multiple places within the
> resource, such as navigation menus with 8 or more links, can be bypassed by
> people who use screen readers or who navigate via keyboard or keyboard
> interface.
> Guideline 2.4, level 3, SC 4c
> Current wording
> Supplying an informative title for each page or resource that can be accessed
> independently (for example, from a search results page)
> Discussion
> Since a page is a resource that can be accessed independently, we can just
> delete 'page' here. 'page' can remain in the for example part because it's
> just an example and not the guideline itself. BTW, I prefer if we use a more
> direct formulation, for example "Supply a title" instead of "supplying a
> title" but that's for another editor.
> Proposed wording
> Supplying an informative title for each resource that can be accessed
> independently (for example, from a search results page)
> Guideline 2.4, level 3, SC 4d
> Current wording
> Supplying a unique title for each page or resource that can be accessed
> independently (for example, from a search results page)
> Discussion
> Same as above, SC 4c.
> Proposed wording
> Supplying a unique title for each resource that can be accessed independently
> (for example, from a search results page)
> Guideline 3.1, level 1, SC 1
> Current wording
> Page titles are informative.
> Discussion
> What's the difference with Guideline 2.4, level 3, SC 4c mentioned above? Or
> do we mean, "if you use a page title, make sure it is informative". Unless I
> understand what is meant, I doubt I will come up with a good new wording.
> Proposed wording
> Titles of resources are informative.
> Guideline 3.1, level 3, SC 4, strategy alternative representations bullet 2
> Current wording
> Adding non-text content to the site for key pages or sections specifically to
> make the site more understandable by users who cannot understand the text only
> version of the site.
> Discussion
> If we reformulate using 'parts of the resource' we don't need the distinction
> between pages and sections anymore. I dislike the word 'key' in the sense of
> 'important' because of the association with the typing thingies. I had to read
> the sentence twice because at first I didn't know where 'specifically' was
> associated with. My proposed wording suggests a solution for these problems as
> well.
> Proposed wording
> Adding non-text content to the site for important parts of the resource to
> make the site more understandable by users who cannot understand the text only
> version of the site.
> Guideline 3.1, level 3, SC 4, strategy alternative representations bullet 3
> Current wording
> Using page design, graphics, color, fonts, animations, video, or audio to
> clarify complex text.
> Discussion
> "page design" includes graphics, color, fonts, etc. The term sounds broader
> than we mean. I suggest using 'layout' instead.
> Proposed wording
> Using layout, graphics, color, fonts, animations, video, or audio to clarify
> complex text.
>  
> Guideline 3.1, level 3, SC 4, strategy alternative representations bullet 4
> Current wording
> Including non-text content to supplement text for key pages or sections of the
> site.
> Discussion
> See above, bullet 2.
> Proposed wording
> Including non-text content to supplement text for important parts of the
> resource.
> Guideline 3.2, guideline text
> Current wording
> Organize content consistently from "page to page" and make interactive
> components behave in predictable ways.
> Discussion
> I have explained my preference for the wording for 3.2 in the thread
> 'Suggestion for this editorial note' in my e-mail from May 2, 2004. [1]
> Proposed wording
> Organize content consistently throughout the resource and make interactive
> components behave in predictable ways.
> Guideline 3.2, level 2, SC 1
> Current wording
> Components that are repeated on multiple "pages" within a resource or a
> section of a resource occur in the same sequence each time they are repeated,
> for at least one presentation format.
> Proposed wording
> Components that are repeated in different places within the resource occur
> in the same sequence each time they are repeated, for at least one
> presentation format.
> Guideline 3.2, level 2, SC 3
> Current wording
> Changing the setting of any input field should not automatically cause an
> #extreme change in context# such as leaving the "page."
> Proposed wording
> Changing the setting of any input field should not automatically cause an
> #extreme change in context# such as changing the current location within the
> resource. 
> 
> Guideline 3.2, level 2, SC 4
> Current wording
> Interactive elements that appear on multiple "pages," including graphical
> elements, are associated with the same functionality wherever they appear.
> Proposed wording
> Interactive elements that appear in different places within the resource,
> including graphical elements, are associated with the same functionality
> wherever they appear.
> Guideline 3.2, level 3, SC 2
> Current wording
> Graphical components that appear on multiple pages, including graphical links,
> are associated with the same text equivalents wherever they appear.
> Proposed wording
> Graphical components that appear in different places within the resource,
> including graphical links, are associated with the same text equivalents
> wherever they appear.
> Guideline 3.2, level 3, SC 3
> Current wording
> Components that appear visually on multiple pages, such as navigation bars,
> search forms, and sections within the main content, are displayed in the same
> location relative to other content on every page or screen where they appear.
> Proposed wording
> Components that appear visually in different places within the resource, such
> as navigation bars, search forms, and sections within the main content, are
> displayed in the same location relative to other content each time they
> appear. 
> Guideline 3.2, level 3, SC 4
> Current wording
> When components such as navigation menus and search forms appear on multiple
> pages, users can choose to have those elements presented in a different visual
> position or reading-order.
> Proposed wording
> When components such as navigation menus and search forms appear in different
> places within the resource, users can choose to have those elements presented
> in a different visual position or reading-order.
>  
>  
> Yvette Hoitink
> Heritas, Enschede, the Netherlands
> E-mail: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl
> WWW: http://www.heritas.nl
>  
> [1]. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0223.html
> 
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2004 18:02:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:30 GMT