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

Re: Discussion of checkpoints 7.6 and 7.7

From: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 11:45:01 -0400
Message-ID: <391EC9FD.411DF997@clark.net>
CC: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
I've some answers to the questions below.  I will await further discussion
on the checkpoints and their priorities though.


Ian Jacobs wrote:
<snipped>
> 
> Here are some questions that may be asked about checkpoint 7.7:
> 
>   Q1: What type of configuration is being required,
>       configuration of the navigation capabilities, the set
>       of elements, or both?
dp both unless we have a different checkpoint for one or the other.
> 
>   Q2: If about configuration of the set of elements, is the
>       requirement to be able to choose any subset of the elements
>       in the document? Or just from among some element types
>       (e.g., headings, forms, tables)?
dp this is tough and should be applied sensably especially when
configuration gets down to a fine level.  at what point does the element
structure become the actual page?  We have some examples out in the wind of
how this can work.  we can already navigate among links so filling in and
allowing gradients top down say headings down to the specifics of a table
are in order but I again caution to the sensable approach.  I may not be
adding any thing new or terribly insightful here but this is my reaction to
the question.  What I think w ewant to accomplish here is to provide
unimpeeded navigation among elements that one can go into and also among
elements that have contant that can be stepped through below them.  so for
instance, if I am navigating among headings, I can expand that part of the
page below the heading to its ajacent table or set of links.  I see a user
agent that complies with this allowing the tab key to accomplish the
requested navigation or perhaps the arrows or both.  I'd like for instance
to be able to tab through headings bidirectionally especially if the
headings are mused in the proper way by the author. 
>       How does the user agent allow configuration for
>       XML applications about which it knows nothing (as opposed
>       to HTML, where the user could choose from among some known
>       element types)?
dp wouldn't applicability apply to xml in this case?
> 
>   Q3: Is the requirement that the user be able
>       to change the set dynamically (control) or only statically
>       (configuration)? Might there be a difference in priority between
>       a configuration reequirement and a control requirement?
I'd say controll as p2 and configure as p3.
> 
> Proposal 1: Make 7.7 only about configuration and leave it a P3:
> 
>    <NEW>
>    7.7 Allow the user to configure the set of elements
>    navigable according to checkpoint 7.6.
>    </NEW>
> 
>   However, refer to question 2 above.
> 
> Proposal 2: Make dynamic control a P2 requirement that is part
>    of checkpoint 7.6. Structured navigation would include,
>    therefore, the ability to select whether to explore the
>    contents of an element. There might be two approaches to
>    this:
>        a) A skip functionality. This is an additional
>           navigation capability beyond sequential.
>        b) Shrink/Expand subtrees. This option change the
>           set of navigable elements.
> 
>    There are probably advantages to both. The ability to hide content
>    can help people get a better sense of a document's overall
>    structure when they have more than serial access to it.
> 
> I don't consider these strong proposals and I look forward to
> input from the Working Group.
dp the datta is there.  we need to make it work is all.  My thought here is
that we can run into problems when we start asking questions about impropper
use of html for the elements we are trying to configure?

again, when using jfw I encounter situations where I must tweek the
rendering of certain content because it doesn't make sense ie: I have to
turn off the speaking of certain elements because they actually hinder my
use of the page.  For instance, if there is a large graphic on a page and I
ask for a list of links and the graphic is one of the links, I'll hear the
same link name untill I get past that link which may be several to 10
times.  turning off rendering/speaking of graphical links prevents this
behaviour.  similarly, if frame rendering or speaking is giving me trouble
while traversing a page, I can have the frame tags not spoken.

one more note with thanks.  a skip feature is good and jfw uses this in
several ways in ie.
one way is that you can define the size of the first text block to look for
in a page and the other that I know of is that you can be positioned on the
first new link of a page when each page has the navigation or all the same
links at the top.
  
> 
>  - Ian
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000AprJun/0359.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-20000507
> [3] http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#233
> 
> --
> Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
> Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

-- 
Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/poehlman
http://poehlman.clark.net
mailto:poehlman@clark.net
voice 301-949-7599
end sig.
Received on Sunday, 14 May 2000 11:44:48 GMT

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