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

Re: Review of M. Rothberg's "Control and Configure" Comments, Also Sy nchronization Definition

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 10:03:29 -0500
Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20000522100304.00bcbf00@staff.uiuc.edu>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Responses in JRG:
At 05:37 PM 5/19/00 -0400, you wrote:
Control and Configure - Review of M. Rothberg's Comments

I feel quite torn on this issue.
1. I would like to simplify things for developers, but I am not sure what
will be simplest for them in some instances.
2. I agree with Jon's interest in avoiding complications for developers and
focusing on the word "control" (I have pushed in that direction), but it
appears to me that checkpoint 10.7 ("For the configuration requirements of
this document, allow the user to save user preferences in a profile.
[Priority 2]") will not be helpful in bringing to bear configuration
requirements unless the term "configure" actually appears in the those other
checkpoints. If we really want developers to configure, I think we need to
say it in the specific checkpoint (of course, the developer still needs to
figure out what level of granularity, etc.) to use in developing the
configuration feature.

JRG: In 10.7 we can set the minimum requirements for satisfying this 
checkpoint as allowing configuration of all checkpoints that require 
"control" of something

3. I agree with Al Gilman's concern about the hard distinction between
control and configure have offered a revised definition of "Control (and
Configure)" that attempts to soften the distinction. I have a general unease
about locking user agent developers into too rigid of a software model.
Nevertheless, I think there is a distinction to be made and if we are going
to use both terms, I think that we need to explain even more clearly what we
mean.

JRG: I think we need to define what we mean by control and configure.  We 
also have a priority system that often makes control or configuration a 
higher priority in some checkpoints.  I think I like the idea of using just 
one term like "control" and in the satisfaction of a checkpoint point out 
it a persistent setting is the requirement.  For example "Allow the user to 
control the rendering of alternative equivalents".  The minimum requirement 
is that the user sets the user agent to render a particular alternative 
equivalent and that setting is used for all resources loaded during that 
session.

4. As I stated when I first read Madeleine's suggestions, I found myself
generally agreeing with her. In saying that, I guess that I am also saying
that it is probably not enough to say "control" only for some of these
checkpoints.

JRG: I think this depends on how we define "control" and the minimum 
requirements for each checkpoint.

<OLD>
2.2 For presentations that require user input within a specified time 
interval, allow the user to configure the time             interval (e.g., 
to extend it or to cause the user agent to pause the presentation 
automatically and await user input before proceeding). [Priority 1]
</OLD>

<NEW>
2.2 For presentations that require user input within a specified time 
interval, allow the user to control the time             interval (e.g., to 
extend it or to cause the user agent to pause the presentation 
automatically and await user input before proceeding). [Priority 1]

</NEW>
Minimum requirement for 2.2: Currently our minimum requirement is to allow 
the user to set the user agent to automatically pause for user 
inputs.  This could be a keyboard toggle, a check box in a dialog somewhere 
or a item in a menu or the voice command like "Pause multi-media for 
synchronized input".


<OLD>
2.3 If content available in a viewport has equivalent alternatives, provide 
easy access in context to the alternatives. [Priority 1]
</OLD>

<NEW>
2.3 If content available in a viewport has equivalent alternatives, allow 
the user to easy control access in context to the alternatives. [Priority 1]
</NEW>

Minimum requirement for 2.3: The alternative equivalents must be rendered 
in the same view port as the primary content.  We currently do not say that 
this needs to be a global setting or not.


Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
MC-574
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
Received on Monday, 22 May 2000 11:03:31 GMT

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