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

Re: new check point (6.7) proposed

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 08:49:42 -0500
Message-Id: <199910081304.JAA23576@smtp1.mail.iamworld.net>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
At 10:24 PM 10/7/99 -0500, schwer@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
>
>
>>>6.7 Support plug-in and virtual machine system conventions for loading and
>>>running an assistive technology. For example, the Sun Java virtual machine
>>>supports loading and running of assistive technologies. (priority 1)
>>
>>MN:  I have half an idea what is meant by this, in terms of UAs, but would
>>surely like to see this reworded prior to inclusion such that the UA portion
is
>more
>>clear, esp. before going with P1.
>
>OK. Is this clearer:
>
>6.7 Support assistive technology accessibility standards defined for plug-in
and
>virtual machine systems used by your browser. [priority 1]
>
>   For example, Sun defines a mechanism for loading and running and running a
>assistive technology in its Java virtual machine. If the user agent supports
>Java applets and provides a Java Virtual Machine to run it, the user agent
>should support the proper loading and operation of a Java native assistive
>technology.  This assistive technology can now be used to provide access to
the
>applet as defined by Sun's Java accessibility standards. It may be that
>plug-ins, such as Adobe Acrobat Reader, may define similar accessibility
>conventions in the future.
>
>Note: the techniques document supplies example code for loading assistive
>technologies in Java.
>

AG:

Maybe we should write this in logic parallel to the "use standard system API"
rule.

[start draft segment]

For each behavior extension mechanism (aplets, plug-ins, etc.) supported by
the
UA, support the standard extensibility features for AT compatibility defined
for that mechanism.  For example, ...

[end draft segment]

If one stands far enough back, a Virtual Machine is a Virtual Device and the
interface to it is a system interface with [in the Java VM case] starndard
methods of inserting extensions at the interface.  The system interface
becomes
an extension insertion point.  The reason we require that device services use
the system-standard API is because the system defines methods for AT to
capture
or intercept the runtime interfaces that go with these APIs, and insert
alternatives or active pipes.  These form extension insertion points in the
system control and data flow.

One option is to fold in "extension architectures" along with "OS or language"
in the guideline to "support the standard extension features supporting AT
compatibility."  If we make it clear enough with the example.


Al

>Rich
>
>Rich Schwerdtfeger
>Lead Architect, IBM Special Needs Systems
>EMail/web: schwer@us.ibm.com
<http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/rich.htm>http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/rich.htm
>
>"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -
>I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.",
Frost
>  
Received on Friday, 8 October 1999 08:50:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:49:34 GMT