W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: Guideline 1.3 and user interface changes

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 12:49:17 -0500
To: <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>, "'Web Content Guidelines'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050503174921.3BA7460C17F@m18.spamarrest.com>

Thanks Jason,


Jason, you wrote 
> Correct. Now if we substitute "programmatically made" for
> "programmatically determined" in my reply, all of my points are still 
> applicable.



To follow this - I had to go back and pull up the original post - so I have
attached it below for others as well.  

I can see what you mean - but do we really want to approach the problem that
way.   It seems indirect and hard to follow.   Using "programmatically made"
to mean "programmatically operate a standard control that will in turn make
the change", seems to be a bit of a multi-layer interpretation of the term
"programmatically made".  It isn't inaccurate I guess - but it seems
roundabout and hard to follow to me.


 Also, isn't approach 2 (exemplified by case 2) redundant with case 1?
I think we already require that the control be accessible (case 1) below.
So is there a need to use the indirect "programmatically made" requirement
of case 2.   

How about if we just say something like "all controls needed to carry out
the full functionality of the content need to be operable by AT"?   


 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Jason White
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:36 PM
To: Web Content Guidelines
Subject: Guideline 1.3 and user interface changes


This is an action item from today's meeting.

It has been proposed under guideline 1.3 that changes to the user
interface (including state/value information) can be programmatically
determined.

Gregg offered the following scenario:

A user interface control, when activated, causes some of the content
to be replaced by a translation into another natural language. He then
suggested that the proposed requirement would demand translation
capabilities from the user agent, contrary to the intent of the
success criterion. I shall argue that this is not so, and that the
above scenario does not constitute an objection to the proposal.

There are three cases:

1. The user interface control can be activated programmatically. In
   this case, the change can be made programmatically, namely by
   programmatically activating the u i control. The proposed success
   criterion is satisfied.

2. The u i control cannot be activated programmatically, but somehow
   the user agent is still able to translate the text (a very
   far-fetched possibility). In this case also the requirement is
   satisfied, which is the desired result.

Case 3: The u i control can't be activated programmatically and the
user agent can't perform the translation. The success criterion isn't
met.

These three cases are exhaustive and demonstrate that the above
scenario does not create any problems for the proposed 1.3 criterion.
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 17:49:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:37 UTC