- From: Matt May <mcmay@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:39:53 -0800
- To: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- Cc: WAI GL (E-mail) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
On Mar 26, 2004, at 6:00 AM, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote: > MM: > Systems that store, retrieve and process data are what we call > authoring tools. > The Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 draft defines > "authoring tool" [1] as: > "Any software or service that authors may use to create or modify Web > content for publication." > > Roberto: > Yes Matt, you said right that this is a Draft. But at now there are W3C > Reccomendations that contain a similar definition? Otherwise we have > the > problem of connection between WCAG 1.0 and ATAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 draft > to ATAG 2.0 draft.... MM: The definition of authoring tool in ATAG 2 is not substantially different from that in ATAG 1. It's just a reordering, really, to reflect the current state of the tools. ATAG 1 [1] has one category which is pretty close to the above definition: "Tools for site management or site publication, including tools that automatically generate Web sites dynamically from a database, on-the-fly conversion tools, and Web site publishing tools;" WCAG 1 defines "authoring tools" as [2]: "HTML editors, document conversion tools, tools that generate Web content from databases are all authoring tools. Refer to the 'Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines' for information about developing accessible tools." WCAG 1 doesn't use this definition normatively in the guidelines. Also, ATAG 2 is not tied only to WCAG 2. Tools can claim conformance to ATAG 2 while producing WCAG 1-conforming content, or WCAG 2-conforming content, or both. It is up to the tool to make that claim. Regarding any issues with confusion, it has already been discussed that WCAG 2 should contain expanded explanations of ATAG and UAAG, and their roles in producing accessible content. One important issue in explaining these is that Web applications that produce Web content (e.g., Web-based content management systems) should be looking to ATAG, not just WCAG. That is one message I cannot emphasize enough. - m [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10/#Introduction [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#authoring-tool
Received on Friday, 26 March 2004 14:38:47 UTC