W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 1998

RE: categorization of techniques

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 12:08:23 -0600
Message-Id: <199811171810.MAA27015@staff2.cso.uiuc.edu>
To: Kathy Hewitt <kathyhe@microsoft.com>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
I think we always want to promote compatibility with assistive technology,
since there will always be some users that will need to assistive
technology for the user interface.  For examples a person who is deaf and
blind.

I think when we look at like a Kiosk or a palmtop (?) portable user agent.
There maybe no assistive technology available or included.  In this case we
would want to promote direct accessibility by the user agent. 

We can work with the language and if you have any suggestions please send
them to the list.

Do you think the two tiered system would work for your needs?


Jon


At 09:33 AM 11/17/98 -0800, Kathy Hewitt wrote:
>I disagree with the wording of:
>[Direct or Compatible]
>This technique can be implemented directly or through compatibility with
>assistive technology when assistive technology is commonly available to
>provide access to the user agent.  If assistive technology is not commonly
>available this feature should be directly implmented.
>
>What does it mean for an assistive technology to be commonly availabe and
>who decides if it is commonly available?
>
>If it is going to be listed as [Direct or Compatible] then it should remain
>an either/or listing and not this ambiguous "can be done directly or through
>compatibility, but if not compatible, then it must be direct".
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jon Gunderson [mailto:jongund@staff.uiuc.edu]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 1998 9:16 AM
>To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
>Subject: categorization of techniques
>
>
>The current model for categorization of techniques, requires two levels.
>
>1. Priority Level (need from the users perspective)
>[Priority 1] 
>This technique must be implemented otherwise one or more groups of users
>with
>disabilities will find it impossible to access information. Implementing
>this
>technique is a basic requirement for some individuals to be able to use the
>Web. 
>[Priority 2] 
>This technique should be implemented, otherwise one or more groups of users
>will
>find it difficult to access information. Implementing this technique will
>significantly improve access to the Web for some individuals. 
>[Priority 3] 
>This technique may be implemented, to make it easier for one or more groups
>of
>users to access information. Implementing this technique will improve
>access to
>the Web for some individuals. 
>
>2. Implementation Recommendation (
>[Direct]
>This technique must be implemented directly by the user agent and provide
>comaptibility for third party assistive technology
>
>[Direct or Compatible]
>This technique can be implemented directly or through compatibility with
>assistive technology when assistive technology is commonly available to
>provide
>access to the user agent.  If assistive technology is not commonly available
>this feature should be directly implmented.
>
>How does this model work for people?
>
>Jon
>
>Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
>Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
>Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
>University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
>1207 S. Oak Street
>Champaign, IL 61820
>
>Voice: 217-244-5870
>Fax: 217-333-0248
>E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
>WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
>	http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
> 
Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
1207 S. Oak Street
Champaign, IL 61820

Voice: 217-244-5870
Fax: 217-333-0248
E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
	http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
Received on Tuesday, 17 November 1998 13:10:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:48:38 GMT