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

Re: Question about access to ALL content - UAAG 2.1 P1

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:24:19 -0600
Message-Id: <4.1.20000323150625.00ac3ec0@staff.uiuc.edu>
To: pjenkins@us.ibm.com, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Phil,
Checkpoint 2.1 can be satisfied through providing access to all content
through the built-in user interface or through an API (DOM).  It is the
intention that all information be available through the DOM or some other
interface for non-HTML or non-XML documents.  It was not the intention to
have all the content of a resource available through the user interface,
since information on element attributes like class or id are not really
useful to most users and do not improve accessibility.  The guidelines may
need to be clearer what content needs to be available through the user
interface.

As to whether having a source view mode would satisfy this checkpoint is an
interesting question.  My first impression is that it seems to solve the
checkpoint in a legal perspective, but it doesn't seem to quite honor the
spirit of the checkpoint in making all content accessible in a usable way.
I'll take this back to the group.

Thank you for your comments.  They only help make a better document.

Jon



At 08:36 AM 3/23/00 -0600, pjenkins@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
>
>After reading the user agent proposed rec guidelines [1] document and the
>associated techniques [2], I have a question about how to interpret the
>priority 1 checkpoint 2.1 Ensure that the user has access to all content
>... The techniques [2] give examples about AMAYA's ability to show the
>attributes of an element - which is nice,  but more like what I would
>expect from an editing tool and environment than what I would expect from a
>user agent that majors in rendering content.  But my question is;  -  would
>the current technique of rendering the source view of the content meet this
>checkpoint?  If not, it needs to be explicitly stated.  If it would be OK,
>then the instances for which it would be O.K. need to be stated in the
>techniques.
>
>My concern is over priority 2 or 3 content from the WCAG [3].  For example,
>why is it a priority 1 for the browser to render the title attribute on the
>HR element?  Sure the author and/or authoring tool went to the trouble to
>put a title there, but what is the benefit in this case for accessibility?
>Would not access to the source view meet the checkpoint?  Content is
>defined in the glossary [4] as including comments, in addition to elements
>and attributes.  Would the browser need a separate accessible user
>interface for rendering the comments?   - other than the source view?
>
>More examples from the WCAG checklist need to be considered.  I have listed
>the ones that first come to mind here for further discussion:
>1.1 Object types (not to be confused with objective alternative which is
>   P1)
>2.1 Color attributes (not to be confused with high contrast requirement)
>4.1 Natural language (identifying - not rendering)
>4.2 ACRONYM and ABBR expansion
>4.3 Primary language of document (identifying - not rendering)
>5.2 Table elements and attributes (i.e., what kind of a cell is this? TH vs
>   TD vs TFOOTER, etc.)
>12.3 LEGEND for FIELDSET, OPTGROUP for SELECT, etc.
>12.4 LABEL FOR vs what is it's LABEL
>13.2 Metadata added as semantic information about page and site navigation
>
>I believe access to the source view would meet the checkpoint in the above
>cases.  More easier to use accessible user interfaces are up to the user
>agent designer upon which they will compete.
>
>Also, the wording of the checkpoint is interesting.  Is the phrase "ensure
>... access to all" meant to be different  than say for example,  "render
>all"?
>
>[1]
>http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/PR-UAAG10-20000310/uaag10.html#gl-content-access
>[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10-TECHS/#content-access
>[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/
>[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/PR-UAAG10-20000310/uaag10.html#def-content
>
>[previously posted to AU in error]
>
>Phill Jenkins
>http://www.ibm.com/able
>

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
Received on Thursday, 23 March 2000 16:24:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:49:52 GMT