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

Re: Comments on draft

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0400
Message-ID: <37C5F348.34D22CC0@w3.org>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
CC: WAI UA group <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>, howcome@operasoft.com
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> 
> The following are comments I took away from a discussion with Hakon Lie of
> opera software. Hakon also took some notes to find out about some features
> - I hope he will be able to give us some further feedback on them.

I'm cc'ing H&kon on this message.
 
> All comments are based on the 16 July version.

Reference here:
[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WAI-USERAGENT-19990716/
 
> Charles
> 
> checkpoint 2.5 Allow the user to turn on and off author-specified keyboard
> combinations
> 
> I assume that this refers to accesskey and the like, but it is not clear
> from the guidelines - an example would suffice.

The change already appears in the 9 August draft; there is now mention
of both HTML accesskey and tabindex.
 
> Guideline 4 Allow the user to configure the User Agent (and guidelines 5 and
> 6 too)
> 
> Implementation of CSS will solve most of these problems. Given that the
> WCAG also recommend the use of style sheets, and now rely on an interim
> solutions checkpoint to cover the situation 'until user agents support CSS',
> and given that CSS is a recommendation of W3C, designed to provide these
> functions in an interoperable way, perhaps it should be a checkpoint. I would
> suggest that it is in fact a priority 2 checkpoint - it is possible to be
> accessible without it, but in the real world it causews a number of other
> problems.

I don't believe we should have a checkpoint specific to style sheets,
even though they would enable user agents to satisfy many of the
checkpoints. In fact, we went from a checkpoint about style sheets
to one more generally about supporting W3C specs.

On the other hand, a note in the Techniques (or even the Guidelines)
about how an implementation of CSS1 (or CSS2) would satisfy
many checkpoints (and which ones) would be helpful.

Hakon, do you still have a list of checkpoints you feel would be
satisfied? Can you make that available to the WG?

You might want to look at the latest version [2] from 9 August.

[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WAI-USERAGENT-19990809/
 
> checkpoint 4.2 allowing the configuration of visual layout. Technique
> suggestion: allow for multiple icon sizes.

I will include that in the Techniques document, but I'm not sure
how it addresses the checkpoint.
 
> 5.5 allow turning on/off captions
> 
> this should say "for video/audio", unless it actually means the caption
> element of a table, in HTML.

How about "audio captions" with a link to the definition of "caption".
 
> 5.11 Allow the user to turn off spawned windows
> 
> An alternate approach might be to import the history nto the new window. This
> solves the problem of not being able to get back to where the user was. If
> this were done then the user would have to be force the inclusion of controls
> in a window - currently netscape allows a window to be spawned with no
> controls, and non resizeable.

This is being debated now on the list. I proposed deleting
this checkpoint [3] in favor of other solutions. 

[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0212.html
 
> 9.5 ensure that when the focus changes it si in the viewport after the
> change.
> 
> For features like search, the focus should not be underneath the search
> window...

Please explain this, I'm not sure I understand.
 
> 11.2 Support appropriate w3c recommendations
> 
> Should specify the CSS2 cascade order,

That's mentioned in the Techniques. Actually, by reference
since the Techniques point to the CSS accessibility Features
Note [4], which says to implement the CSS2 !important semantics

[4] http://www.w3.org/1999/08/NOTE-CSS-access-19990804 
 
> 12.1 use and provide accessible interfaces to other technologies
> 
> The wording is a bit vague. Presumably this means providing APIs..
> 
> In general guideline 12 seem a bit undercooked. I think we should ask the
> people with aprticular experience in this area (Rich, Glen, Mark N, and
> others) to have a close look at this guideline.

Hakon, please let us know when you can join the teleconference
and we will schedule a review of this Guidelien and invite
other developers.

Thank you for the comments Hakon and Charles,

 - Ian


-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel/Fax:                     +1 212 684-1814
Received on Thursday, 26 August 1999 22:09:49 GMT

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