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

Re: Comments and suggestions related to current guidelines

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 17:07:33 -0400
Message-ID: <37ADF195.2484E9F2@w3.org>
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu>
Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Jon Gunderson wrote:
> 
> Ian,
> I have attached a text file with comments related to the current
> guidelines through guideline 7.  I hope to get to the rest of the
> guidelines this afternoon.  I have included some suggested text for sub
> headings.

For the sub-heading text, I've edited and included it for the next
draft.

Below I have some questions and comments.

>Add specialized browsers for specific disabilities to the 
>list of types of dependent user agents

Which specialized browsers?

>JRG: Does checkpoint 2.5 currently only refer to ACCESSKEY bindings?

>If it only relates to ACCESSKY, maybe we just want to have a checkpoint that >states this more directly, like the ability to turn on or turn off ACCESSKEY >bindings

Actually, I think this refers to all author-specified keyboard
behavior. "accesskey" is the HTML method for authors to 
specify key bindings.  There may be other ways in other languages. Also,
"Behavioral Extensions to CSS" suggests using a selector mechanism
for assigning script handlers to element/event combinations.

We can mention accesskey and tabindex explicitly after the main
checkpoint text.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/becss

> 
> Checkpoint 2.6 Indicate the keyboard access method to activate a user agent function using platform conventions. [Priority 2] Techniques for checkpoint 2.6 
> 
> JRG: Does checkpoint 2.6 currently only refer to how to activate an author supplied ACCESSKEY binding to a link or a control?
> 
> If it is only related to ACCESSKEY, then maybe it should be stated for ACCESSKEY >in the checkpoint.  Otherwise I am not sure how it is different from checkpoints >2.2 and 2.3

This checkpoint means "Show users keyboard bindings by using standard
OS approaches, such as underlining letters in menu entries to indicate
the key used to activate the menu.
 
I propose this rewrite:

       Use platform conventions to indicate which keys
       activate which user agent functionalities.
          For example, on some platforms,
          if a functionality is available from a menu, the
          letter of the key that will activate that functionality is 
          underlined.

> Checkpoint 2.8 Provide a default keyboard configuration for frequently performed operations. [Priority 3] 
> JRG: Seems redundant with checkpoint 2.1 and related to 2.4.  Its relationship  >to 2.4 seems to be that if the user can configure, part of that should be able to >return to the default settings.  I would suggest combining the two checkpoints

I don't think it's redundant - this one says "provide a useful default
configuration", which is separate from "ensure that all functionalities
are available from the keyboard" and "allow customization of the
keyboard". There may be ways to combine this one with other checkpoints,
but I don't see the need.

>JRG: Would like to add a checkpoint related to turning on or off the rendering of >tables at a priority 3.

Do you mean not having tables rendered at all ('display:none') or 
having tables rendered linearly? I'm pretty sure we've resolved
the table linearization issue (by requiring that dependent UAs permit
table cell navigation and requiring that all UAs give access to
content for selected elements, including table cells). My comment
supposes that the issue is access to cell content. Is there another
issue that has to do with simplifying layout?

> JRG: Checkpoint 6.12 should be priority one for people with hearing loss

I propose that this checkpoint be dropped. Volume is controlled
by the knob on the speaker or at the OS level.

> JRG: Checkpoint 7.12 Seems to be linked to the checkpoint, 
> 9.16...

I agree. In the recent proposal for checkpoints of Guideline 9 [2],
there is a checkpoint requiring UAs to make available information
that will enable users to decide whether to follow a link. I agree with
you that 7.12 and 9.16 should be merged and I believe merged with
the 9.5 proposed in [2]. 

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0084.html


 - Ian

-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel/Fax:                     +1 212 684-1814
Received on Sunday, 8 August 1999 17:07:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:49:15 GMT