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

CleverKeys, dictionary.com and "programmatically located"

From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 20:13:35 -0500
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040318183056.01e5e398@localhost>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Cc: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl, nabe@lab.twcu.ac.jp, seeman@netvision.net.il, shadi@w3.org, charles@w3.org

There are several questions in this email. Please respond in-line to each 
question or group of questions.

Yvette, Takayuki, Lisa, Shadi, Charles - I ask language-specific questions 
at the end of the email.  I appreciate feedback on any of the questions 
that you wish to answer.

There are several tools that people can use to select a word in Web content 
and look up the meaning in a dictionary.  Examples include:

1. "CleverKeys is free software that provides instant access to definitions 
at Dictionary.com, synonyms at Thesaurus.com, and more — from almost all 
Windows or Mac OS programs, including word processors, Web browsers and 
most e-mail programs. With CleverKeys, the answers are just a click away."
<http://www.cleverkeys.com/ck.html?p=home&os=>

2. In Opera, you can, "Translate words in other languages, or look them up 
in a dictionary. Simply double-click on a word, or right-click on a 
selection."  This is #10 in the list at:
<http://my.opera.com/community/tips/oneliners/>

Do these methods, and similar ones like them, satisfy the four 
"programmatically located" aspects of 3.1?
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-20040311/#meaning>

Here are some tests (with CleverKeys for Windows) and questions:

1st Success Criterion to test: Level 1, #2  - "The meaning of abbreviations 
and acronyms can be programmatically located."

Test 1: go to the W3C [1], highlight the second instance of "W3C" in the 
first paragraph, press control+L to activate CleverKeys.
[1] <http://www.w3.org/>

Result 1: It lists the correct expansion of W3C 
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=%20W3C%20>

Question: Does this satisfy the success criterion?  If so, is it a user 
agent feature instead of an author responsibility?  If not, what more does 
the author need to do?  If it satisfies the criterion, do we need the 
criterion?  If we keep the criterion, is user agent support a sufficient 
technique?

Test 2: go to the W3C [1], right-click on the second instance of "W3C" in 
the first paragraph,  select "dictionary" from the pop-up menu.

Result 2: It does not list the correct expansion of W3C
<http://www.infoplease.lycos.com/search.php3?in=dictionary&query=W3C>

Question: Does this fail the success criterion?  If it fails, is it a 
failure of the user agent or of the author?  If the author, what should the 
author do?


2nd Success Criterion to test:  Level 2, #2 - The meanings and 
pronunciations of all words in the content can be programmatically located

Test 3: go to the W3C [1], highlight "specifications" in the first 
paragraph, press control+L to activate CleverKeys.

Result 3: It finds a definition for "specifications" - 
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=specifications>

Question: Does this satisfy the success criterion?  If so, is it a user 
agent feature instead of an author responsibility?  If not, what more does 
the author need to do?


3rd Success Criterion to test: Level 2, #3 - The meaning of all idioms in 
the content can be programmatically determined.

Test #4: go to ESL idiom page [2], highlight "beat around the bush," press 
control+L to activate CleverKeys.
[2] <http://www.eslcafe.com/idioms/id-list.html>

Result #4:  It displays the result for "beat."  In the results is a list of 
idioms that contain the word "beat" - including "beat around/about the bush 
- To fail to confront a subject directly."
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=beat%20around%20the%20bush>

Question: Does this satisfy the success criterion?  If so, is it a user 
agent feature instead of an author responsibility?  If not, what more does 
the author need to do - link directly to the definition of "beat around the 
bush" instead of the general "beat?"

4th Success Criterion to test: Level 3, #1 - The meaning of contracted 
words can be programmatically determined.

Test #5: go to cybernothing [3], highlight the word "can't," press 
control+L to activate CleverKeys.
[3] <http://www.cybernothing.org/>

Result #5: The results begin with "cant" and further in the list is "can't 
- Contraction of cannot."  <http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=can%27t>

Question: Does this satisfy the success criterion?  If so, is it a user 
agent feature instead of an author responsibility?  If not, what more does 
the author need to do - link directly to the definition of "can't?"

Language questions:
1. Are there similar tools and dictionaries that are freely available in 
other languages?
2. Assuming there are similar tools for Dutch, how would the results differ 
for Dutch words that are aggregates of words? As with idioms, will tools 
look for the meaning of each separate word?
3.  What about Japanese?  Hebrew? Spanish? Arabic?  German? French?  Are 
there similar tools for these languages?  What issues would tools have in 
other languages?
4. If automatic lookup of words works for some languages and not others, 
how do we create guidelines that will apply across languages?
5. If the tools are possible, but not available today, do we write "lowest 
common denominator" guidelines that apply across all languages, or do we 
have different guidelines depending on tools available today?
6. Is user agent support a sufficient technique?

-- 
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
http://www.w3.org/WAI/
/--  
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2004 20:13:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:55 UTC