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

Re: Challenges on JavaScript Techniques

From: Christophe Strobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 20:25:23 +0200
Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20050708101441.0318ae78@mailserv.esat.kuleuven.be>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Hi Peter-Paul,

At 00:43 8/07/2005, Peter-Paul Koch wrote:

> > 5)       We don't have a large team of volunteers who are expert in
> > JavaScript which would be necessary to mount the kind of effort needed to
> > produce the JavaScript Techniques document we had been planning.
>
>I am willing to devote some time to creating good examples of
>accessible JavaScript, or, at least, examples of JavaScript code
>designed to keep the HTML page they appears on accessible.
>(...)
>
>Since I'm a new member,

Welcome! (Welkom!)

>I'd appreciate:
>
>a) a link to the current Scripting Techniques document

Client-side Scripting Techniques for WCAG 2.0: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-WCAG20-SCRIPT-TECHS-20050630/Overview.html


>b) a short summary of the purpose of this document

If you don't mind, I'd like to use the opportunity to sketch a somewhat 
broader picture.
As you know, each requirement in WCAG 2 must be verifiable [1]. Anything 
that is normative in WCAG 2 must be testable [2]. WCAG success criteria are 
also meant to be technology-independent [3], but you can only test 
something that is implemented in a technology. So Techniques documents 
could contain testable statments that prove that success criteria can be 
reached and are therefore testable. ("Anti-techniques" might show how one 
can fail success criteria.) However, the Techniques documents contain tasks 
instead of testable statements, and the tasks are accompanied by acceptable 
and (sometimes also) deprecated examples that illustrate the tasks, and by 
test files in test suites. So one could argue that the examples and test 
cases prove that the techniques are testable, which in turn proves that the 
success criteria are testable [4].
The Client-Side Scripting Techniques are important because WCAG 2.0 
introduces the concept of baseline and the scripting techniques are a major 
test for this concept. For example, techniques may have different levels of 
usefulness depending on the baseline. Also, scripting may be in the 
baseline, but the user does not necessarily have scripting enabled. One of 
the recent discussions in the working group was about whether techniques 
should be described with respect to the baseline or with respect to the 
different technonologies (and what happens if different technologies work 
together)?
In the conference calls of the last two weeks [5] [6], the working group 
has been harvesting techniques. Your expertise will be very helpful.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2-req/#clear-reqs
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2-req/#normative (see N5)
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2-req/#cross-tech
[4] This is my own summary of the discussion in the 11 May telecon 
(http://www.w3.org/2005/05/11-wai-wcag-minutes.html) and other discussions.
[5] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/30-wai-wcag-minutes.html
[6] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/07-wai-wcag-minutes.html


Regards,

Christophe Strobbe

-- 
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on 
Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/ 
Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 18:26:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:39 GMT