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

Re: T.V. Raman review of last call UAGL.

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:31:05 -0500
Message-ID: <3843FBC9.A321C6C@w3.org>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org, ramantv@earthlink.net
Ian Jacobs wrote:
> 
> "T. V. Raman" wrote:
> >
> > Attached is my review of the UA guidelines.
> > The document looks very good --most of my comments are minor
> > editorial nits.
> > Hope this is useful--
> > and if necessary, feel free to forward this to the whole
> > list.
> 
> I've put up T.V.'s comments at [1].
> 
> Thank you T.V.,
> 
>  - Ian
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/1999/11/raman-uagl-comments.html

My comments below:

> T. V. Raman:Comments On UA Guidelines
> 
> Section 1
> 
> I'm a little confused by the usage of words like must in the 
> introduction section of the document. For example,
> here is a specific example: 
> 
>       Communication through standard interfaces is particularly important for
>       graphical desktop
>       browsers, which must make information available to assistive technologies. 
> 
> Do you really intend must to mean need to in the above? Stylistically
> (and perhaps even grammatically) I'd
> nuke the comma and change which to that in addition to 
> changing must to need to. 

I think the requirement is stronger than what you are suggesting.
Graphical
desktop browsers are, in fact, required by these guidelines 
to make information available to ATs. It's a Priority 1 requirement
(checkpoints 5.1, 5.3, 5.5, and 5.6), hence "must".


> Also, the following
> statement --which appears numerous times-- makes no sense to me: 
> 
>       o Links to definitions are highlighted through the use of style sheets. 
> 
> The offending phrase is through the use of style sheets. The user reading the document can tell that
> something is highlighted --how does one know (or why should one care) that it is done through the use of
> stylesheets? 

Links to definitions are indicated graphically with green, italic text
by
default. The idea was to allow users to specify their own style
preferences
for that class of links if desired. We try to expose the use of style
sheets for this purpose without going so far as to say
"class="dfn-instance")
Note that we also use: rel="glossary" and title="Definition of XYZ" in
the
link, so there's no shortage of information. 

 
> Section 2
> 
> Guideline 2
> 
> Nit:word closed is repeated in: 
> 
>       of closed closed captions (or subtitles) available (e.g., in 

Fixed.
 
> Guideline 3:
> 
> In 3.7, the statement 
> 
>       Users should be able, for security reasons, to prevent scripts from executing on their machines. 
> 
> though factually true has nothing to do with accessibility --especially the way it is tacked on to the bit about
> avoiding flicker. 

Yes, this has been pointed out and will be cleaned up by moving the
comment to the Techniques document.
 
> Guideline 4
> 
>       Ensure that the user has control over the colors, text size, speech rate and pitch, and other
>       stylistic aspects of a resource and can override author styles and user agent default styles. 
> 
> Sentence too long --looks like a lawyer wrote it. 

Worse, a tax lawyer. Just kidding.

> Split it into two sentences so the second half --the bit about
> user control-- doesn't get lost. 

Sounds good.
 
> 4.2 Controlling Font Size And Style
> 
>       For example, allow the user to control font size through style sheets or the user interface. 
> 
> Phrase "or the user interface" in the sentence above makes no sense in the presence of the preceding
> stylesheets reference in the same sentence --especially since it is written as stylesheets or user
> interface. What is the intent here? If the guideline is trying to say allow the user to load a custom stylesheet
> --or alternatively, specify a font family and style directly through the UA's user interface-- the checkpoint
> should just say that in as many words. 

Ok.
 
> Guideline 5
> 
> This sentence looks malformed --it appears to have head nor tail. 
> 
>       Communicate with other software (assistive technologies, the operating system, plug-ins)
>       through applicable interfaces and observe conventions for the user interface, documentation,
>       installation, etc. 

I'll add "e.g.," before "(e.g., assistive technologies, ...). And I'll
break into two sentences, giving:

<QUOTE>
Communicate with other software
(e.g., assistive technologies, the operating system, plug-ins)
through applicable interfaces. Observe conventions
for the user interface, documentation, installation, etc.
</QUOTE>
 
> 5.6
> 
>       User agents should export these interfaces using available operating system conventions. Note.
>       The DOM Level 1 specification states that "DOM applications may provide additional interfaces
>       and objects not found in this specification and still be considered DOM compliant." 
> 
> Why should the operating system be involved in the DOM? 

Because the DOM doesn't specify how the interfaces it specifies are
actually
exported for use. For example, on a Windows platform, COM or CORBA may
be the conventional ways of getting at the DOM interfaces.

> Also, the note that is tacked on to the sentence in
> question looks out of context. 

Perhaps the note belongs in the techniques document. The question that
motivated the Note was: Is it possible to conform to the DOM while 
doing more than what the DOM specifies? The answer is yes. 


 - Ian

-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel/Fax:                     +1 212 684-1814
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 1999 11:31:46 GMT

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