W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > January to March 1999

Re: comments on section 4

From: mark novak <menovak@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 14:00:06 -0500
Message-Id: <v0300780ab2f2121b4e01@[128.104.23.196]>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
hi

[ February 10th version ]

along with Kitch's comments, I was wondering why 4.1.2, Ensure that product
documentation is available in at least one accessible, open standard
electronic
format (e.g., HTML, XML, ASCII)., was not a priority 1?   Just seems a bit
strange that so much effort is going into improving the UA, yet  "at least one"
accessible form of the documentation is only a "should" (priority 2
definition).

mark



>Hi,
>
>
>The following are my comments on section 4, "Ensure that the user interface
>is accessible." My comments are based on the February 10th version of the
>guidelines at http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-WAI-USERAGENT-19990210/ My
>comments are preceded by KB: and I've cut any text that I thought was ok as
>is. I hope they make sense.
>
>
>Kitch
>
>
>
>Section 4.1 Ensure accessible product installation, documentation, and
>configuration
>
>4.1.1 [Priority 1]
>     Ensure that the software may be installed in a device-independent
>manner for all supported input and output devices.
>
>KB: I think the words "for all" should be replaced with "using any" so the
>checkpoint would read
>
>     Ensure that the software may be installed in a device-independent
>manner using any supported input and output devices.
>
>
>4.1.4 [Priority 2]
>     Follow operating system conventions for user interface design, user
>agent configuration (including configuration profiles), product
>installation and documentation, and accessibility flags and interfaces.
>
>KB: Should the last word, interfaces, be changed to settings? I assume that
>this checkpoint means that user agent should pass through OS accessibility
>settings such as color schemes and font sizes that the user has set in the
>OS. I don't know if accessibility interfaces is clear.
>
>
>
>Section  4.2 Support input and output device-independence
>
>
>4.2.3 [Priority 1]
>     Ensure that the user can activate the links in a document in an input
>device-independent manner.
>4.2.4 [Priority 1]
>     Ensure that the user can activate the form controls in a document in
>an input device-independent manner.
>
>
>KB: Did we decide on the teleconference that these two checkpoints could be
>combined into a single checkpoint by substituting "all active elements" for
>"links" and "form controls" ?
>
>
>
>Section  4.3 Support accessible keyboard input
>
>
>
>4.3.1 [Priority 2]
>     Allow the user to configure keyboard access to user agent
>functionalities. Configuration includes the ability to specify single as
>well as multi-key access.
>
>
>KB: This may be a silly question, but will it be obvious to developers what
>single and multi-key access means? I wonder if the checkpoint should read -
>Configuration includes the ability to specify single keystroke commands as
>well as commands that require keystroke combinations.
>
>
>
>4.3.2 [Priority 2]
>     Ensure that user can find out about all keyboard bindings.
>4.3.4 [Priority 3]
>     Display keyboard bindings in menus.
>
>KB: We discussed on the telecon that checkpoint 4.3.4 is covered by
>checkpoint 4.3.2.
>
>
>
>  4.4 Ensure that users can disable features that might interfere with
>accessibility
>
>KB: suggested rewording
>
>Users must be able to turn on and off support for features that may
>interfere with accessibility. User agents are only expected to provide [KB:
>this] control for content that it recognizes [KB: such] as an image,
>blinking text, etc. For example, an applet may cause text to blink but the
>user agent may not be able to detect it since the blinking text is
>generated by an applet rather than markup or style sheets.  A user agent
>should recognize text that blinks because of markup or style sheets.
>Details are provided in the techniques document.
>
>
>
>
>4.4.12 [Priority 1]
>     Allow the user to turn on and off support for spawned windows.
>
>KB: I know that spawned windows are a problem but I am not sure if it is a
>priority 1 problem. What do people think? Is it important to let the user
>turn off this feature or should the user agent just make sure that the user
>is notified when a new window is spawned?
Received on Thursday, 18 February 1999 15:06:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:38:21 UTC