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: Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:38:56 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: User Agent Guidelines Emailing List <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
aloha, jon!

i agree with jon that the proposed change to 2.1 needs to be explicitly 
stated, and i'm leaning towards endorsing the view that the user needs to 
have access to ALL alternative equivalents through the user 
interface...  providing a fall-back mechanism within the user agent is a 
far bigger accessibility gain than relying on an API alone to expose 
alternative content -- especially since there will (for the foreseeable 
future, at least) be many cases where a particular API either isn't 
supported or doesn't yet exist...

it falls under the classification of a clarification, as i don't see the 
HTML 4x rec forbidding complying user agents from enabling the user to 
expose the content of NOFRAMES, merely an explicit statement that when 
configured to display frames, the user agent should not also simultaneously 
render the content of the NOFRAMES declaration...  it clearly implies that 
users could be offered the choice between rendering frames and NOFRAMES, 
but doesn't proscribe their exposition (as an alternative to frames) 
according to user preferences, so i don't perceive a conflict between the 
HTML 4x rec and UAAG checkpoint 2.1, as proposed...

i also think, as i repeatedly stated at the last telecon, that as far as 
2.1 is concerned, the question of a source view satisfying the point is a 
red herring...  it's a great thing to have, and i personally wouldn't use a 
tool that lacked one, but it doesn't satisfy UAAG 2.1


At 05:02 PM 3/31/00 -0600, Jon Gunderson wrote:
> >
> >   Proposal: Change checkpoint 2.1 to read: "Ensure that
> >   the user has access to all alternative equivalents
> >   through the user interface."
>JRG: I like this concept being clearly stated in the guidelines and I think
>it is an important part of 2.1 that is not covered somewhere else in the
>guidelines.  I share Ian's concerns with this change and will think about
>it some more.
> >Issue 2: Does a source view satisfy checkpoint 2.1?
> >
> >   Phill Jenkins asked [5] whether a source view would
> >   satisfy checkpoint 2.1.
> >
> >   I think it is difficult to conclude from the document
> >   that a source view is not part of the user interface
> >   (and in my opinion, a source view is part of the user
> >   interface).
> >
> >   However, there seems to be consensus that a
> >   source view does not satisfy 2.1
> >   (whatever the outcome of Issue 1) because it does not
> >   present content in a form that most people can actually
> >   use. It is entirely unacceptable to expect a user to
> >   read the binary format of a GIF image. It is less
> >   unacceptable to expect a user to read the text that's
> >   available in the middle of an HTML file, but that still
> >   requires knowledge of the markup language that we
> >   should not expect of users (whether or not they
> >   have a disability).
> >
> >   Thus, there seems to be consensus that:
> >
> >   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.
>JRG: I don't really think Checkpoint 2.1 has anything to do with source
>view.  If you provide a source view it should be accessible.  But I don't
>think a source view in of itself makes a user agent more accessible to the
>typical user.
>Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
>Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
>Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
>Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
>College of Applied Life Studies
>University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
>1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL  61820
>Voice: (217) 244-5870
>Fax: (217) 333-0248
>E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
>WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
>WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua

He that lives on Hope, dies farting
      -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1763
Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
    WebMaster and Minister of Propaganda, VICUG NYC
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2000 03:34:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:26 UTC