W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2007

RE: Not described in words

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:39:14 -0400
Message-ID: <CCDBDCBFA650F74AA88830D4BACDBAB5130FA86A@wdcrobe2m02.ed.gov>
To: "Sean Hayes" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

<current>
All functionality of the content is operable through a keyboard interface without requiring specific timings for individual keystrokes, except where the underlying task requires time-dependent analog input.
</current>

> GV "The first is the requirement that keyboard input not have 
> timing requirements on it.  That is you can require the 
> person to tap out Morse code on a key and call that keyboard access".

It is subtle, but from my recent conversation with Gregg I understand that "specific timing for individual keystrokes" is about *how* the keys are pressed and not *when* the keys are pressed.  I used Frogger to illustrate the difference, but Morse code could work as an example if it uses two keys (one for each tone).

> SH:  Maybe something like:
> "All functionality is operable through a keyboard interface, 
> except where the command or outcome cannot be reproduced by 
> [a small set of strokes]"

I think this is good, but it is almost recursive in how it excludes a built-in Mouse-Keys-Like feature.

[And yes, I do believe that such a possibility must be considered. I have had more than one developer cite Mouse Keys (at the OS level) as satisfying 508 1194.21(a)!]

I also think the current wording is okay, but ambiguous on the timing aspect, and I am at a loss to provide a suggestion for improving it.  Is the How to Meet the place to explain that games that use timing as play element do not automatically fail 2.1.1?  I would like to see the examples for illustrating "time-dependant analog input" to be less exotic.  (Maybe Paint and Mine Sweeper, instead of Water Coloring and Helicopter Simulator?)

Of course, I still feel "not textually discernable" is easier to parse than "time-dependant analog input" so perhaps my judgment is suspect...
Received on Monday, 19 March 2007 12:41:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:49 GMT