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

Re: potential dependencies with authoring tools

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 17:25:18 -0400
Message-Id: <199909142127.RAA15857@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
At 01:04 PM 9/14/99 -0500, Kitch Barnicle wrote:
>
>Authoring tool checkpoint 3.2 Do not insert automatically generated (e.g.,
the
>filename) or place-holder (e.g., "image") equivalent text, except in cases
>where human-authored text has been written for an object whose function is
>known with certainty. 
>Dependency: There appears to be a potential discrepancy  between this
>checkpoint and the User agent checkpoint 3.5, which states that if
alternative
>content is not provided user agents should indicate the type of object

>present.  Are these checkpoints suggesting opposite solutions?
>

Not quite.  This is a situation-dependent difference in what is acceptable.  

The User agent should attempt repair and tell the user what it can
determine about the undocumented entity.  The authoring tool which can get
better information from the author should not use this repair strategy
automatically -- that would make it too tempting for the author to avoid
providing the right kind of information.  The user agent may and should
apply grosser hacks to work with bad content than the authoring tools
should automate.

Al
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 1999 17:25:26 GMT

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