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

Re: User Agent Last Call Period Extended to 14 May 2001

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 13:12:59 -0400
Message-ID: <3B094C9B.6BEAD3B3@w3.org>
To: "earl.johnson" <Earl.Johnson@sun.com>
CC: eve.maler@sun.com, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org, access@sun.com
"earl.johnson" wrote:
> 
> Hi Ian,
> 
> My responses are indented and preceded by an EJ.

Mine are IJ2:

[snip]

IJ2: On the topic of suggested key sequences:

[snip]
> EJ      Good point. The real issue isn't what the keysequences are,
>         which was seemingly the main point of our suggestion, but which
>         things need one to ensure they are specified and none get
>         missed. What are your thoughts on digging out and centralizing
>         what actions need keyboard support to ensure full access to the
>         content is provided?

IJ2: I think that's covered by checkpoint 11.5, which is a list of
functionalities that must have bindings (in the default configuration). 
And then we have a requirement (11.3) that the user be able to override
the default bindings. So 11.5 is the WG's list of important
functionalities. After these basic ones, we stopped because we
are expecting diverse user agents to conform, and we can't
really predict every function that will be useful for a particular
type of user agent.

[snip]

> > > We recommend the definition of applet be added to this
> > > document and that it be referred to somewhere in guideline #6
> > > (somewhere in 6.4-6.7 or in the general discussion on he
> > > guideline).
> >
> > [Issue]
> > IJ: Ok. Do you have a good one for us?
> >
> EJ      How about this one:
>         http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/projects/t1glossary2000/_applet.html

IJ2: Thanks!
 
> > I've added this as issue 511
> >   http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc3.html#511


[snip]

> > ==============
> > > Guideline 10
> > >
> > > Is this guideline covering both the visual and programmatic
> > > aspects of orienting the user? Right now it seems to focus
> > > on the visual aspects of orientation. We recommend
> > > clarification on this point be placed in the general
> > > description for this guideline.
> >
> > IJ: [Editorial]. The answer is:
> >
> >  a) It's not just visual orientation.
> >  b) It's not programmatic orientation.
> >
> EJ      b) didn't ring clear in this section, it seemed to focus more
>         on a).

IJ2: I will make it clearer.
 
> > Your question applies to every Guideline: Must these
> > requirements be met through the user interface (whether
> > visual or other), or does making information available
> > through an API suffice? Section 3.7 states (under
> > Requirements for content, user agent features, or both):
> >
> >    "The user agent must satisfy all requirements involving
> >    user interaction (both user input and output to the user)
> >    through the user interface of the subject of the
> >    claim. This includes not only the requirements that
> >    directly refer to to user control, configuration, etc.,
> >    but also requirements that indirectly involve the user
> >    interface (e.g., system conventions pertaining to the
> >    user interface)."
> >
> > Let me know if this is a sufficient answer to your comment.
> >
> EJ      If the programmatic point came thru clearer... Perhaps reword
>         to something like: "This includes not only the visual and
>         programmatic requirements that directly refer..."?

IJ2: How about instead:

 - The API requirements of this document are in Guideline 6.
 - Everything else (needs double checking) is not to be
   satisfied through an API alone. 
 
> > ==============
> > > Guideline 12
> > >
> > > We recommend specifically saying that the online help
> > > documentation provided with the UA must include discussion
> > > of all user agent features that benefit accessibility. It is
> > > typically where people start when they need to find out more
> > > about the workings of a product.
> >
> > IJ: [Editorial] This is already covered by checkpoint 12.2.
> > The claimant may include any source of documentation they
> > wish in the claim. We have not made any requirements about
> > document delivery mechanisms: it doesn't matter in UAAG 1.0
> > whether the help information is available separately on CD,
> > on the Web, or is integrated upon installation.
> >
> > I propose that we recommend that online help include
> > discussion of accessibility features, but for the purposes
> > of satisfying checkpoint 12.2, it isn't required that this
> > information be on the Web.
> >
> EJ      Wellll, it really doesn't touch on the original point - having
>         it in the product's online help. Isn't this the place anyone
>         who is using the product will look first when they have a
>         problem or question? If it's agreed that this happens to be the
>         case, it seems reasonable and important to specifically state
>         this in the UAAG. As somewhat of a counter proposal, perhaps
>         our point can be specifically added to the Note?

IJ2: Sounds good to me!

-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                    +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 21 May 2001 13:13:09 GMT

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