W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: parent child relationships in Wiki

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lguarino@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:22:24 -0800
To: David MacDonald <befree@magma.ca>, "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BFFE1B20.7D41%lguarino@adobe.com>
I would expect general techniques are listed under Situation A and Situation
B, without an addition <H5>. If there are no Situations, the general
techniques are listed in place of Situation A, that is, at level 3. Iım not
sure why this outline shows <General Techniques> within <Optional
Techniques>.

I agree that for consistency, we should adopt one of the conventions:
1. Unless a technique is listed in a Technology-Specific section, it is a
general (technology independent) technique, or
2. All general techniques occur within <General Techniques> sections, and we
use them within Situation sections and the Techniques Section as well as the
Optional Techniques section.

My preference is for the first option, but we should at least be consistent.

Iıve also see SC where we added Technology-Specific sections beneath Common
Failures. The same convention should apply there.

Perversely enough, ³Use technology-specific techniques to accomplish XXX² is
a general technique.


On 1/26/06 3:09 AM, "David MacDonald" <befree@magma.ca> wrote:

> Would it be safe to say under that Situation A and B there are <H5> general
> techniques only, and if there are no Situation A, B sections in a SC it is
> because there are no Sufficient Technology Independent Techniques?
>  
> David MacDonald
> 
> ŠAccess empowers people
>            Šbarriers disable themŠ
> www.eramp.com <http://www.eramp.com>
> 
> 
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
> Of Gregg Vanderheiden
> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 10:53 PM
> To: 'WCAG'
> Subject: RE: parent child relationships in Wiki
>  
> 
>  Here is the layout
>  
> Gregg
>  
>  
> <H2>How to Meet Success Criterion X.X.X
>  <H3>Key Terms 
> <H3>Intent of this success criterion
>            <H3>Techniques for Addressing Success Criterion x.x.x
> <H4>Situation A: xxxxxx
> <H4>Situation B: yyyyy
> <H4>Technology-Specific Techniques
> <H5>HTML
> <H5>CSS
> <H5>Xxxxx
> <H4>Common Failures Identified by the Working Group
> <H4>Optional Techniques (Advisory) for x.x.x
> <H5>General Techniques
> <H5>HTML
> <H5>Xxxxx
> <H3>Benefits: How Success Criterion x.x.x helps people with disabilities
> <H3>Examples of Success Criterion x.x.x
> <H3>Related resources
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Gregg
> 
>  -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center
> University of Wisconsin-Madison
> 
>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
>> Of David MacDonald
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 1:35 PM
>> To: 'Loretta Guarino Reid'; 'Gregg Vanderheiden'; 'WCAG'
>> Subject: parent child relationships in Wiki
>> Is there a definitive layout for the ³How to Meet² docŠ
>>  
>> i.e.
>>  
>> Success_Criteria
>> <key_terms>
>> <intent>
>> <examples>
>> <sufficient_techniques>
>>            <technology_independent>
>>            <HTML>
>>            <CSS>
>>            <more Š>
>>            <common_failures>
>> <optional_techniques>
>>            <technology_independent>
>>            <HTML>
>>            <CSS>
>>            <more Š>
>> <benefits>
>> <examples>
>> <related_resourses>
>>  
>> If this heading order is wrong or the parent child relationships are wrong,
>> could someone correct it and post it to the list? I think it will be helpful
>> to have something clearly laid out for everyone to see.
>>  
>> I went through the WIKI and found the following:
>>  
>> These have HTML headings in both the Sufficient and Optional sections:
>>  
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.1.1
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.1.3
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.1.4
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _2.4.4
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _3.1.1
>>  
>> These have SMIL headings in both Sufficient and Optional sections:
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.2.1
>>  
>> This has CSS in both the Sufficient and optional sections:
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.3.2
>>  
>> The Following have Situation A, Situation B headings but the other techniques
>> donıt:
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.1.1
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.1.3
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.3.2
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _1.3.4
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _2.5.1
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _2.5.2
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _2.5.3
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _2.5.4
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _3.1.1
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _3.1.2
>> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterion
>> _3.1.5
>>  
>>  
>> Iım OK with looking at it laterŠbut I donıt understand the outline as it
>> stands right nowŠ
>>  
>> I donıt think we should put the technology independent techniques in the
>> optional section because many of them are not optional.
>>  
>> 
>> ŠAccess empowers people
>>            Šbarriers disable themŠ
>> www.eramp.com <http://www.eramp.com>
>> 
>> 
>> From: Loretta Guarino Reid [mailto:lguarino@adobe.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 1:16 PM
>> To: David MacDonald; 'Gregg Vanderheiden'; WCAG
>> Subject: Re: Need to have a "technology independent" heading in the GL
>>  
>> I donıt understand why you think the current organization lacks of clarity.
>> 
>> Adding additional layers of labels makes it even harder to understand the
>> relationships between the different pieces. It just adds one more ³link² to
>> follow before you finally reach the information about the technique.
>> 
>> Canıt we just add technology independent techniques to the optional section,
>> before the technology-specific subsections?
>> 
>> 
>> On 1/25/06 10:05 AM, "David MacDonald" <befree@magma.ca> wrote:
>> 
>> We have headings for HTML and CSS techniques in both the sufficient and
>> optional sections. Why not have ³Technology Independent Techniques² headings
>> in both the sufficient and optional sections? I think clarity is more
>> important than duplicate duplicationsŠ
>>  
>> Cheers
>> David MacDonald
>>  
>> 
>> ŠAccess empowers people
>>            Šbarriers disable themŠ
>> www.eramp.com <http://www.eramp.com>
>> 
>> 
>> From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu]
>> <mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu%5d>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 12:35 PM
>> To: 'David MacDonald'; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: Need to have a "technology independent" heading in the GL
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The tech indep show up in two places.
>>  
>> Either ­ in a sufficiency statement
>> Or ­ in an advisory area.
>>  
>>  
>> We used to have the sufficient ones listed just after the sufficiency section
>> but it seemed so redundant that we removed it.
>>  
>> Anything that is a link in the sufficient section is a tech indep technique.
>>  
>> Having a section for them seemed to make sense but Š can't figure out how to
>> do it without having duplication repetitively in a duplicative fashion.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Gregg
>> 
>>  -- ------------------------------
>> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>> Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
>> Director - Trace R & D Center
>> University of Wisconsin-Madison
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]
>>> <mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org%5d> On Behalf Of David MacDonald
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 4:23 PM
>>> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>>> Subject: Need to have a "technology independent" heading in the GL
>>> In the ³How to meetŠ² Document, I think we need to have a ³Technology
>>> Independent² heading in the techniques. I donıt think it is clear if we just
>>> have some general techniques with no heading followed by a heading that says
>>> ³Technology-Specific².
>>>  
>>> Regards
>>> David MacDonald
>>>  
>>> ŠAccess empowers people
>>>            Šbarriers disable themŠ
>>> www.eramp.com <http://www.eramp.com>
>> 
>>  
>>  
> 
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2006 14:23:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:42 GMT