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

Re: FW: Mock-up of merged WCAG 2.0 and XAG

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:18:08 -0500
To: Kerstin Goldsmith <kerstin.goldsmith@oracle.com>
Cc: lisa seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-Id: <1080595088.3856.25.camel@seabright>
On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 16:04, Kerstin Goldsmith wrote:
> Another vote for Ian's proposal - can we make an agenda item of this
> for this or next Thursday?  I believe that Ian might just be correct
> in thinking that this might speed up and simplify the WCAG 2.0
> timeline.

I'm happy to attend a call.

I'd like to make one more "promotional" comment: When I have
read WCAG 2.0 drafts over the past year, I have noted a struggle
to include requirements such this one in the 11 March 2004
draft [1]:

  "The following can be derived programmatically (for example, 
   through a markup or data model) from the content without 
   requiring user interpretation of presentation. ...
   hierarchical relationships such as paragraphs and lists...
   emphasis on specific words..."

There are tons of format specifications out there. They don't
all include markup for emphasis or lists, nor should they. 
I don't believe it will help authors to say "Use emphasis"
if they are using a format specification that does not
include markup for emphasis!

Hence, the proposal suggests that WCAG 2.0 say the following:

 a) Authors should use accessible format specifications
    and use them as follows to create accessible content.
 b) To make an accessible format specification, do the
    following:
      i) If it includes audio, do the following..
     ii) If it includes video, do the following..
    iii) If it's a basic document language, use something
         in the HTML family.

And do forth.

Of course, authors will not be able to influence very often the 
design of "accessible formats"; this is why I think XAG is so
important and why I would like to see it get done as quickly.

Why do I think this model will speed up work? I think it's
much easier to start with a statement like "Assume the author is using a
format that supports accessibility" and to work from
there. The first requirement that comes to mind is "Authors
must use the accessibility features of the format; see
part two of this document where those are discussed." 

Then, the rest of "Part One" of WCAG can focus on HOW
authors use those features to create accessible content,
e.g., by building clear navigation, by using simple language, 
etc. 

Thanks for reading the proposal,

 _ Ian

[1]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-20040311/#content-structure-separation 
-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447

Received on Monday, 29 March 2004 16:20:24 UTC

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