W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: Checkpoint 13.2 - metadata

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:44:30 +0900
Cc: michael.virant@dse.vic.gov.au, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
To: Matthew Smith <matt@kbc.net.au>
Message-Id: <876B5DAD-1EE0-11D8-8C06-000A958826AA@sidar.org>

I think I have a similar viewpoint to Matt.

There is a difference between conforming to the guidelines, and 
accessibility. (There is a huge difference between conforming to the 
bare minimal level-A and accessibility. Triple-A conformance is more 
useful, I think).

As far as the checkpoint goes, it seems pretty clear that if there is 
no metadata then the page fails. I don't actually see what the 
relevance of it being in a protected area is - I work a lot in 
post-login parts of the Web, as many people do, and the same things 
apply inside and out. I work with semantic web agents that get into 
protected areas all the time too.

AGLS data is useful for a variety of purposes, but it is worth looking 
over the discussion that took place recently about what kind of 
metadata is useful for accessibility in particular - 

There are a couple of other discussions that take place - the 
SWAD-Europe project does some work on this, Dublin Core has an 
accessibility group (and you can meet lots of the relevant people at 
the OzEWAI conference in melbourne next week where this will be a 
discussion topic ;-) and there are discussions in the WCAG working 
group from time to time, where there are a few implementors at work.

The w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org mailing list is for a group that is apparently 
getting a new charter and new life - that is another place where people 
with some expertise can be found.



On Tuesday, Nov 25, 2003, at 06:16 Japan, Matthew Smith wrote:

> michael.virant@dse.vic.gov.au wrote:
>> To meet this checkpoint - must post-login pages to a web application
>> contain metadata?
> A few thoughts:
> The big question is: does the application have to comply with 13.2 or 
> does the application just need generate accessible content?  (I know 
> that there are people working for the South Australian Government who 
> think that every page must contain embedded Dublin Core metadata - 
> even if they don't know why.)
> I have pondered this issue long and hard and have decided NOT to 
> include metadata in post-login pages for the following reasons:
> * I am not aware of any situation where a lack of metadata would stop 
> a user, whether or not using assistive technology, from being able to 
> access the page content.
> * Software that is used to catalogue/index pages by reading metadata 
> would not have access to the controlled area.
> I suppose that it could be argued that someone may be using some form 
> of Semantic Web agent to access the application for them, but I can't 
> see that day being upon us for some time.
> To summarise my thoughts: the WCAG is GUIDELINES for making Web 
> content accessible; if my application is fully accessible by my client 
> group, it is this, not marking points of a checklist that is important 
> to me.
> IF, however, we are talking about more than just one application - for 
> instance an entire intranet with diverse content - I feel that we 
> should be complying with 13.2.  An intranet can be nearly as anarchic 
> as the Internet if users are all posting their own material.  (I say 
> this from bitter experience having worked for a large multinational 
> with the most inaccessible, unnavigable intranet.)  A large enough 
> intranet really can benefit from metadata and, working internally, the 
> agents that read and make sense of it.
> Hope this helps...
> Cheers
> M
> -- 
> Matthew Smith
> Kadina Business Consultancy
> South Australia
> http://www.kbc.net.au
Charles McCathieNevile                          Fundación Sidar
charles@sidar.org                                http://www.sidar.org
Received on Monday, 24 November 2003 19:49:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:26 UTC