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

Re: Minutes

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 13:39:37 -0600
Message-Id: <199812161939.NAA21284@staff2.cso.uiuc.edu>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Cc: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, WAI UA group <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
What if an operating system that you are developing a user agent for does
not support device independence?  

Does that mean the user agent must create new APIs to handle device

How does this impact touch screen Kiosks?  

How would this guidelines help them understand Kiosk developers what they
need to provide for accessibility?

Please provide revised working for review.


At 12:08 PM 12/16/98 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>I was basing my statements on the revsed wording which I proposed - device
>independent control mechanism, rather than redundant means, since I don't
>see that there is a need for much redundancy, which simply adds bloat to
>the progams.
>This would mean that you don't need any of the things Jon listed, you
>simply need some kind of API (or to take advantage of one that the OS can
>be relied on to have provided already) which allows access to the
>A simple solution would be a menu somewhere which gave access to each
>command/function which could be carried out by the UA, and to which there
>was some reconfigurable access mechanism. Such a menu used to be part of
>MS Word - I think it was a precursor to the process of customising
>toolbars. But most functions (mouse-based ones may be more difficult) can
>be readily provided in this way, and the problem is solved. The makers of
>a single switch interface can then provide, using whatever User Interface
>they see fit, access to the functions of this browser by means of that
>--Charles McCathieNevile -  mailto:charles@w3.org
>phone:(temporary) +1 (617) 258 8143  http://purl.oclc.org/net/charles
>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative -  http://www.w3.org/WAI
>545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, USA
>On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>  There was discusion that it may be to vague during the meeting.  Ian said
>  that this item was being referenced to much by other techniques and
>  therefore may need to be refined.  When I read it now I think that it is
>  difficult to interpret.  The way it is written now I don't know when I
>  satisfy it.  
>  Do I need to provide Braille input and a Braille keyboard device?
>  Do I need speech recognition and speech output?
>  Do I need a single switch scanning system?
>  How much redundency satisfies this requirement?
>  Please submit your view and your interpretation to the list for
>  In my view this technique does not fly with the current wording.
>  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
Received on Wednesday, 16 December 1998 14:39:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:22 UTC