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

Impact of not setting baseline and writing SC as functional outcomes

From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:00:53 -0600
Message-ID: <6EED8F7006A883459D4818686BCE3B3BDDB3C5@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Those in attendance at the March 20 - 21, 2005 face to face meeting
concluded that WCAG 2.0 cannot establish a normative 'baseline' .
Michael, Gregg, John, and Mike took an action item to estimate the
impact of this conclusion on the guidelines, and to make the analysis
available to inform discussion for this week's call.

.

 

Process

Each individual produced an estimate of the impact and we collated these
via voice conferences to get an agreed upon set of conclusions.

 

 

results

For each guideline and SC, we indicate (1) whether a decision not to set
a baseline would affect the wording, and (2) offer proposals
(<proposed></proposed>) where ew were able to do so. In some cases we've
simply noted that there *is* an impact and that more work is required to
get the language right.  The proposed changes also attempt to express
the SC as functional outcomes, as per the discussion at the face to
face.

 

Many thanks to Mike, Michael, and Gregg for many hours' hard work and
good individual and collective effort.

 

 

 

GL 1: Content must be perceivable.

Impacted: no

GL 1.1: Provide text alternatives for all non-text content

Impacted: no

GL 1.1 level 1 success criterion 1: For all non-text content that is
functional, such as graphical links or buttons, text alternatives serve
the same purpose as the non-text content

Impacted: yes

Issue: example included in the current wording is technology- and
content-specific.  Removed to explanatory notes in Guide.doc

<proposed> For all non-text content that is functional, text
alternatives serve the same purpose as the non-text content.</proposed>

GL 1.1 level 1 success criterion 2:  For all non-text content that is
used to convey information, text alternatives convey the same
information

Impacted: no

GL 1.1 level 1 success criterion 3: For non-text content that is
intended to create a specific sensory experience, such as music or
visual art, text alternatives identify and describe the non-text content

Impacted: no

GL 1.1 level 1 success criterion 4: Non-text content that does not
provide information, functionality, or sensory experience is marked such
that it can be ignored by assistive technology

Impacted: yes

<proposed>"Non-text content that does not provide information,
functionality, or sensory experience is implemented such that it can be
ignored by assistive technology.</proposed> [I]"

 

GL 1.1 level 1 success criterion 5: Any text alternatives are explicitly
associated with the non-text content

Impacted: no

GL 1.1 level 1 success criterion 6: For live audio-only or live
video-only content, such as internet radio or Web cameras, text
alternatives describe the purpose of the presentation or a link is
provided to alternative real-time content, such as traffic reports for a
traffic Web camera

Impacted: no

GL 1.1 level 2: 

Impacted: no

Note: no success criteria at this level

GL 1.1 level 3 success criterion 1: For multimedia content, a combined
transcript of audio descriptions of video and captions is provided

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>For multimedia content, a combined transcript of audio
descriptions of video and captions is available.</proposed>

 

GL 1.2: Provide synchronized alternatives for multimedia

Impacted: no

GL 1.2 level 1 success criterion 1: Captions are provided for
prerecorded multimedia 

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>Captions are available for prerecorded multimedia.</proposed> 

GL 1.2 level 1 success criterion 2: Audio descriptions of video are
provided for prerecorded multimedia 

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>Audio descriptions of video are available for prerecorded
multimedia.</proposed>

GL 1.2 level 1 success criterion 3: If multimedia content is rebroadcast
from another medium, the accessibility features required by policy for
that medium are intact 

Impacted: no, but needs work to re-frame as functional outcome rather
than policy issue.

GL 1.2 level 2 success criterion 1: Real-time captions are provided for
live multimedia 

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>Real-time captions are available for live
multimedia.</proposed>

GL 1.2 level 3 success criterion 1: Sign language interpretation is
provided for multimedia 

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>Sign language interpretation is available for
multimedia.</proposed>

GL 1.2 level 3 success criterion 2: Extended audio descriptions of video
are provided for prerecorded multimedia  

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>Extended audio descriptions of video are available for
prerecorded multimedia.</proposed>

GL 1.2 level 3 success criterion 3: Audio descriptions of video are
provided for live multimedia 

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>Audio descriptions of video are available for live
multimedia.</proposed>

 

 

 

GL 1.3: Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are
separable from presentation

Impacted: no

GL 1.3 level 1 success criterion 1: Structures and relationships within
the content can be programmatically determined 

Impacted: no

GL 1.3 level 1 success criterion 2: Emphasis can be programmatically
determined 

Impacted: no

GL 1.3 level 1 success criterion 3: Any information conveyed through
color can be programmatically determined. For example, through markup or
unique characters that accompany the color coding

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome and remove
specific examples from SC (move examples to Guide.doc instead)

<proposed>Any information presented through color is also available
without color.</proposed>

GL 1.3 level 2 success criterion 1: Any information that is conveyed
through color is visually evident without having to interpret color. For
example, the distinction can additionally be determined through context,
characters, or symbols that accompany the color presentation, or through
pattern differences such as dotted red vs. solid green lines in a graph

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome and remove
epecific examples from SC (move examples to Guide.doc)

<proposed>Any information conveyed through color is also visually
evident without color.</proposed>

Note: this differs from level 1 SC in that L1 allows use of markup while
this L2 SC may require a content change to convey the information
visually.

 

 

GL 1.4: Make it easy to distinguish foreground information from
background images or sounds

Impacted: no

GL 1.4 level 1 success criterion 1: Any text that is presented over a
background image, color, or text can be programmatically determined

Impacted: no

GL 1.4 level 2 success criterion 1: Text and diagrams that are presented
over a background image, color, or text have a contrast greater than X1
where the whiter element is at least Y1 as measured by _____

Impacted: no

GL 1.4 level 2 success criterion 2: Text that is presented over a
background pattern of lines which are within 500% +/- of the stem width
of the characters or their serifs must have a contrast between the
characters and the lines that is greater than X2, where the whiter
element is at least Y2

Impacted: no

GL 1.4 level 2 success criterion 3: Users can disable background audio
that plays automatically on a page so that it does not interfere with
text reading software they may be using

Impacted: yes

<proposed>"A mechanism is available to turn off background audio that
plays automatically. So that the audio does not interfere with
text-reading software that may be in use.</proposed>

GL 1.4 level 3 success criterion 1: Text is not presented over any
background (image, text, color or pattern), or if any background is
present, the contrast between the text and the background is greater
than X2

Impacted: no

GL 1.4 level 3 success criterion 2: Audio content does not contain
background sounds or the background sounds are at least 20 decibels
lower than the foreground audio content, with the exception of
occasional sound effects

Impacted: no

 

 

 

 

GL 2: Interface elements in the content must be operable

Impacted: no

GL 2.1: Make all functionality operable via a keyboard or a keyboard
interface

Impacted: no

GL 2.1 level 1 success criterion 1: All of the functionality of the
content, where the functionality or its outcome can be described in a
sentence, is operable through a keyboard or keyboard interface.

Impacted: no

GL 2.1 level 2 success criterion 1: Wherever a choice between input
device event handlers is available and supported, the more abstract
event is used

Impacted: no

Note: this does assume events and event handlers exist.  However, since
the SC would not apply if scripting isn't used,  it is not impacted

GL 2.1 level 3 success criterion 1: All functionality of the content is
designed to be operated through a keyboard or keyboard interface

Impacted: no

 

 

GL 2.2: Allow users to control time limits on their reading or
interaction

Impacted: no

GL 2.2 level 1 success criterion 1: Content is designed so that
time-outs are not an essential part of interaction, or at least one of
the following is true for each time-out that is a function of the
content

Impacted: no

GL 2.2 level 2 success criterion 1: A method is provided to stop content
that blinks for more than 3 seconds

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome

<proposed>A method is available to stop content that blinks for more
than 3 seconds.</proposed>

GL 2.2 level 2 success criterion 2: A method is provided to pause and/or
permanently stop dynamic (moving or time-based) content

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome and improve
readability

<proposed> Moving or time-based content can be paused by the
user</proposed>

GL 2.2 level 3 success criterion 1: With the exception of real-time
events, content has been designed in a way that timing is not designed
to be an essential part of the activity and any time limits in the
content would pass level 1, success criteria 1 for this guideline

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Except for real-time events, timing is not an essential part
of the event or activity presented by the content.</proposed>

GL 2.2 level 3 success criterion 2: Any non-emergency interruptions,
such as the availability of updated content, can be postponed and/or
suppressed by the user

Impacted: no

Note: change suggested to describe functional outcome and improve
readability

<proposed>Any non-emergency interruptions, such as updating content, can
be postponed or suppressed by the user.</proposed>

 

 

GL 2.3: Allow users to avoid content that could cause photosensitive
epileptic seizures 

Impacted: no

GL 2.3 level 1 success criterion 1: Content that violates international
health and safety standards for general flash or red flash is marked in
a way that the user can avoid its appearance

Impacted: no

GL 2.3 level 2 success criterion 1: Content does not violate
international health and safety standards for general flash or red flash

Impacted: no

GL 2.3 level 3 success criterion 1: Content does not violate
international health and safety standards for spatial pattern thresholds
or red flash

Impacted: no

 

 

 

GL 2.4: Provide mechanisms to help users find content, orient themselves
within it, and navigate through it

Impacted: no

GL 2.4 level 1 success criterion 1: Structures and relationships within
the content can be programmatically determined

Impacted: no

GL 2.4 level 2 success criterion 1: Documents that have five or more
section headings and are presented as a single delivery unit include a
table of contents with links to important sections of the document

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Multiple navigation mechanisms are available for collections
of 5 or more delivery units.</proposed>

 

GL 2.4 level 2 success criterion 2: There is more than one way to locate
the content of each delivery unit, including but not limited to link
groups, a site map, site search or other navigation mechanism

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Multiple ways to find specific content within a set of
delivery units are available.</proposed>

 

GL 2.4 level 2 success criterion 3: Blocks of repeated material, such as
navigation menus and document headers, are marked up so that they can be
bypassed by people who use assistive technology or who navigate via
keyboard or keyboard interface

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Blocks of repeated material are implemented so that they can
be bypassed by people who use assistive technology or who navigate via
keyboard or keyboard interface.</proposed>

GL 2.4 level 3 success criterion 1: When content is arranged in a
sequence that affects its meaning, that sequence can be determined
programmatically

Impacted: no

GL 2.4 level 3 success criterion 2: When a page or other delivery unit
is navigated sequentially, elements receive focus in an order that
follows relationships and sequences in the content

Impacted: yes

<proposed>When a delivery unit is navigated sequentially, elements
receive focus in an order that follows relationships and sequences in
the content.</proposed>

GL 2.4 level 3 success criterion 3: Images have structure that users can
access

Impacted: yes

change suggested: delete

GL 2.4 level 3 success criterion 4: Delivery units have descriptive
titles

Impacted: no

GL 2.4 level 3 success criterion 5: Text is divided into paragraphs

Impacted: yes

Text change suggested: Needs further exploration

GL 2.4 level 3 success criterion 6: Documents are divided into
hierarchical sections and subsections that have descriptive titles

Impacted: yes

Text change suggested: Needs further exploration

 

 

 

GL 2.5: Help users avoid mistakes and make it easy to correct them

Impacted: no

GL 2.5 level 1 success criterion 1: no level one SC

Impacted: no

GL 2.5 level 2 success criterion 1: If a user error is detected, the
error is identified and provided to the user in text.

Impacted: no

GL 2.5 level 2 success criterion 2: If a user error is detected and
suggestions for correction are known and can be provided without
jeopardizing security or purpose, the error is identified and the
suggestions are provided

Impacted: no

GL 2.5 level 2 success criterion 3: Where consequences are significant
and time-response is not important, one of the following is true

Impacted: no

GL 2.5 level 3 success criterion 1: Where text entry is required for
which there is a known set of less than 75 valid choices and they can be
provided without jeopardizing security or purpose, users are allowed to
select from a list of options as well as to type the data directly

Impacted: no

GL 2.5 level 3 success criterion 2: If possible for the natural language
of the text, an option is provided to check text entries for misspelled
words with suggestions for correct spellings

Impacted: no

 

 

 

 

GL 3: Content and controls must be understandable

Impacted: no

 

[All of Guideline 3.1 may be impacted by the baseline. Changes not
suggested here, pending comprehensive proposal from John on Guideline
3.1]

GL 3.1: Ensure that the meaning of content can be determined

Impacted: no

GL 3.1 level 1 success criterion 1: The natural language of the document
as a whole can be identified by automated tools

Impacted: yes

GL 3.1 level 1 success criterion 2: The meaning of abbreviations and
acronyms can be programmatically located

Impacted: Yes

GL 3.1 level 2 success criterion 1: The meanings and pronunciations of
all words in the content can be programmatically located

Impacted: Yes

GL 3.1 level 2 success criterion 2: The meaning of all idioms in the
content can be programmatically determined

Impacted: Yes

GL 3.1 level 2 success criterion 3: For each foreign language passage or
phrase in the body of the content, the language is identified through
markup or other means. Foreign passages or phrases are passages or
phrases that are in a language other than the primary language of the
document

Impacted: yes

Note: need to look at language changes in multimedia formats; timed text
handling? Put John's note somewhere: Note: This requirement does not
apply to individual words or phrases that have become part of the
primary language of the content, because "correct" pronunciation of such
words would probably confuse or distract native speakers of the primary
language of the content.[Note: GL 3.1 L3 needs a lot] of work. Proposals
deferred pending more comprehensive proposal from John re; 3.1

GL 3.1 level 3 success criterion 1: Where a word has multiple meanings
and the intended me

aning is not the first in the associated dictionary(s), then additional
markup or another mechanism is provided for determining the correct
meaning

Impacted: Yes

GL 3.1 level 3 success criterion 2: Section headings and link text are
understandable when read by themselves or as a group (for example, in a
screen reader's list of links or a table of contents)

Impacted: no

GL 3.1 level 3 success criterion 3: There is a statement associated with
the content asserting that the Strategies for Reducing the Complexity of
Content (the following list) were considered

Impacted: Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

GL 3.2: Organize content consistently from "page to page" and make
interactive components behave in predictable ways

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Ensure that users can predict the placement and behavior of
content.</proposed>

GL 3.2 level 1 success criterion 1: Any extreme change of context is
implemented in a manner that can be programmatically identified

Impacted: yes

<proposed>A mechanism is available to give automatic notice of any
extreme change of context.</proposed> 

GL 3.2 level 2 success criterion 1: 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

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Components that are repeated on multiple delivered units
within a resource or a collection of delivered units occur in the same
sequence each time they are repeated, for at least one presentation
format.</proposed>

GL 3.2 level 2 success criterion 2: All user interface components should
be able to receive focus without causing activation

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Any content that receives focus does so without causing
automatic activation.</proposed>

GL 3.2 level 2 success criterion 3: Changing the setting of any input
field should not automatically cause an extreme change in context such
as leaving the "page."

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Changing the setting of any input field does not automatically
cause an extreme change in context.</proposed>

GL 3.2 level 2 success criterion 4: Interactive elements that appear on
multiple "pages," including graphical elements, are associated with the
same functionality wherever they appear

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Interactive content that appears in multiple delivered units
is associated with similar functionality wherever it appears.</proposed>

GL 3.2 level 2 success criterion 5: Explicit notice is given in advance
of any extreme change of context

Impacted: yes

Tentative change: Interactive content which would cause change of
context is indicated to users

GL 3.2 level 2 success criterion 6: The destination of each link is
identified through words or phrases that either occur in the link or can
be programmatically determined

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Text that describes the destination of each link is
available.</proposed>

GL 3.2 level 3 success criterion 1: Graphical components that appear on
multiple pages, including graphical links, are associated with the same
text equivalents wherever they appear

Impacted: yes

<proposed>Text alternatives for non-text content that appears on
multiple delivery units are consistent.</proposed>

GL 3.2 level 3 success criterion 2: 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

Impacted: yes

Text change suggested: Change to delivery units, but needs further work

GL 3.2 level 3 success criterion 3: 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

Impacted: yes

Text change suggested: Change to delivery units, but needs further work

GL 3.2 level 3 success criterion 4: There are no extreme changes of
context

Impacted: no

 

 

 

 

 

 

GL 4: Content must be robust enough to work with current and future
technologies

Impacted: no

GL 4.1: Use technologies according to specification

Impacted: no

GL 4.1 level 1 success criterion 1: Except where the site has documented
that a specification was violated for backward compatibility or
compatibility with assistive technology, the technology has:

Impacted: yes

Text change suggested: Needs work to address implied "until user
agents..." concerns

 

GL 4.1 level 2 success criterion 1: no criteria at level 2 

GL 4.1 level 3 success criterion 1: Technologies are used according to
specification without exception

 

 

GL 4.2: Ensure that user interfaces are accessible or provide an
accessible alternative(s)

Impacted: yes

Suggestion pending 4.2 working group

GL 4.2 level 1 success criterion 1: At least one user agent supporting
the content conforms to at least the default set of conformance
requirements of the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 1.0 at
Level A plus the sets of requirements (a) through (i) (below) that
apply. If required plug-ins are not accessible, an alternative solution
is provided that conforms to WCAG 2.0. If inaccessible plug-ins are
available, then a method for obtaining an accessible plug-in is provided
from the content

Impacted: yes

GL 4.2 level 1 success criterion 2: Any programmatic user interface
components of the content conform to at least the default set of
conformance requirements of the UAAG 1.0 at Level A plus the sets of
requirements (a) through (i) (below) that apply. If the custom user
interfaces cannot be made accessible, an alternative solution is
provided that meets WCAG 2.0 (including this provision) to the level
claimed

Impacted: yes

GL 4.2 level 2 success criterion 1: Accessibility conventions of the
markup or programming language (API's or specific markup) are used

Impacted: yes

GL 4.2 level 3 success criterion 1: The Web resource includes a list of
the technologies user agents must support in order for its content to
work as intended. The list is documented in metadata if such metadata is
supported by the format, otherwise it is documented in a policy
statement associated with the content.

Impacted: yes

GL 4.2 level 3 success criterion 2: Users who do not have one or more of
these technologies can still access and use the resource, though the
experience may be degraded

Impacted: yes

GL 4.2 level 3 success criterion 3: Technologies and features on the
required list are open standards or have a public specification

Impacted: yes

 

 

 

"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu 
Web  <http://www.ital.utexas.edu/>
<http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility>
http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility 

 

 

"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu 
Web  <http://www.ital.utexas.edu/>
http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility 

 
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2005 06:01:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:36 GMT