W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: Important: Issues relating to checkpoint 2.1 raised during 30 March teleconference.

From: Hans Riesebos <HRiesebos@alva-bv.nl>
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 11:55:51 +0100
Message-Id: <s8e886e3.041@mail.alva-bv.nl>
To: <ij@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
>>> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> 03/31/00 07:34PM >>>
>Issue 1: What is the scope of checkpoint 2.1?
>   Proposal: Change checkpoint 2.1 to read: "Ensure that
>   the user has access to all alternative equivalents
>   through the user interface."
> 

HR: Sounds fine with me. I can even think of this change as "just a clarification".

>Issue 2: Does a source view satisfy checkpoint 2.1?
>   Phill Jenkins asked [5] whether a source view would
>   satisfy checkpoint 2.1. 
>   a) We are not requiring that user agents provide
>      a source view.
>   b) A source view would not satisfy 2.1
>   c) A source view is useful to some users.
>     

HR: 
a) and c) are true (for me )
b) would still depend on how the source was viewed and what would be considered to be the source. However todays practice and public understanding I think b) is a true statement also. 
I can image an accessible hierarchical view of the (DOM-tree)-source called an "equivilant alternatives-view" (synchronised with the rendered content) that would satisfy checkpoint 2.1

   
>Issue 3: What does "content" mean?
>   - There is document source, which includes associated
>     style sheets, external content such as images,
>     and probably information communicated in HTTP headers.
>   - There is the document tree, which may include
>     content generated by scripts and transformations.
>     What about content generated or suppressed due
>     to user preferences (e.g., use "abbr" for table
>     cell headers instead of TH content)?
>   - There is the rendered content, which is what actually
>     gets presented to the user. In CSS, content generated
>     by style sheets is considered part of rendered content.
>     However, will DOM 3 include this as part of the DOM
>     tree? (I don't know enough about DOM 3 plans to 
>     know this.)

Oke!
I read the term "renderable content". Is this synonym with the DOM-tree content? Even if some content would not be visible, it still would be renderable (rendered invisible). 

Hans Riesebos
ALVA BV, The Netherlands
HRiesebos@alva-bv.nl
Received on Monday, 3 April 2000 05:53:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:03 GMT