W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2001

[Review, Part III] Tantek Çelik / Ian Jacobs comments on 9 April 2001 UAAG 1.0

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:40:20 -0400
Message-ID: <3AE600D4.9CC32B64@w3.org>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org, tantek@cs.stanford.edu
Hello,

This is the third and last of three emails that are the result of a
review by Tantek Çelik of the 9 April 2001 (last call) draft of UAAG
1.0. [1].  This mail proposes some changes to improve the usability of
the document.

 - Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-UAAG10-20010409/

================================
1) Short checkpoint summaries
================================

   [I love this one.] Add a non-normative short summary
   of each checkpoint at the beginning of each checkpoint.
   For example, for checkpoint 3.3:

     3.3 No blinking text. Allow configuration to render animated
         or blinking text as motionless, unblinking text.

   This should make it easier to "scan" the checkpoints to get
   their essential requirement. Also, these headings can be
   highlighted to make each checkpoint stand out more (at least
   visually).

   Furthermore, these short headings (can be marked up as H5
   headings) and can be used to construct an extended table of
   contents (which would appear after the current short table of
   contents).

  [Editor's note: If this type of heading is added, add this
   information to the description of each checkpoint definition
   at the beginning of section 2.]

================================
2) Checkpoints 11.5, 2.3
================================

Tantek suggested making the list in 11.5 a real list (to make it
more readable). For example, use <UL> lists and 'display: inline'.

On a related note, Charles has also suggested that the
presentation of 2.3 be simplified.

================================
3) Grouping of checkpoints in Guideline 12
================================

There are three types of requirements in Guideline 12:

 1) Accessibility of documentation (12.1)
 2) Requirements for substance of documentation (12.2, 12.3, 12.5)
 3) Requirements for structure of documentation (12.4).

I would like the prose of the Guideline to state this, and I'd
like to switch 12.5 and 12.4 to make the checkpoint groupings
consistent with the three types of requirements.

================================
4) More navbars in glossary, references
================================

Provide navigation bars at the beginning of the glossary and
references section (i.e., each key is listed at the beginning of
the section, and links to the full entry).

================================
5) Print styles
================================

Tantek made some suggestions for a print style sheet to improve
the black and white / color printed version. In particular, blue
or red text is rendered as "grey" text in black and white, so the
text is emphasized when in color but de-emphasized in grey. This
can be fixed with (alternative) style sheets.



-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                    +1 917 450-8783
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2001 18:40:27 GMT

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