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

Re: (Action) Issue 394: Proposed revision to checkpoint 2.1

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:05:58 -0500 (EST)
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
cc: <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0101061958460.32745-100000@tux.w3.org>
This is two seperate requirements.

In the past, (e.g. at the Princeton face to face meeting) I have argued that
a source view is not actually necessary.  Earlier versions of Amaya did not
make the source available, although they did provide a structured view of the
entire document object, and I believe that this would have satisfied the
actual requirement.

So I propose the following text:

  <MyNew2.1>

2.1 Make all content available through the user interface. [P1]

Note: The user must have access to the entire document object (including
recognized equivalents, attributes, style sheets, etc.) through the user
interface. This allows the user to view content (markup, style sheets,
scripts, etc.) after it has been processed. A document source view alone does
not satisfy this checkpoint. This checkpoint does not require that all
content be available in every viewport. See guideline 5 for more information
about programmatic access to content.

  </MyNew2.1>

Essentially I have cut the requirement to have a source view per se - it is a
useful technique and should be included in the techniques. But if there is
access already to the document object, a source view is not actually
necessary, so shouldn't be required by a checkpoint. Nor is it sufficient to
meet the checkpoint (which the checkpoint already says).

cheers

Charles McCN

On Sat, 6 Jan 2001, Ian Jacobs wrote:

  Hello,

  Per my action item from the 30 November 2000 teleconference [1],
  please consider this proposed change to checkpoint 2.1 to resolve
  issue 394 [2]. The reviewer wrote:

    "I feel the description of 2.1 is too vague on exactly what portions
    of the content are satisfied by providing a document source
    view. You say it's good enough for some things, but not everything,
    and give a few examples but no clear guidance on how to extrapolate
    to other cases."

  >From the 29 Dec 2000 draft:

  <OLD 2.1>
  2.1 Make all content available through the user interface. [P1]

    Note: Users must have access to the entire document object through
    the user interface, including recognized equivalents, attributes,
    style sheets, etc. This checkpoint does not require that all content
    be available in every viewport. A document source view is an
    important part of a solution for providing access to content, but is
    not a sufficient solution on its own for all content. See guideline
    5 for more information about programmatic access to content.
  </OLD 2.1>

  Comments and observations:

  1) If a document source view alone is not a sufficient solution, then
  Notepad cannot conform to UAAG 1.0. (In any case, whether Notepad can
  conform at P2 depends on whether plain text meets the requirements of
  checkpoint 6.2.). I will assume for the moment that we don't want a
  user agent that consists only of a source view to conform.

  2) I think that 2.1 needs to state clearly that:

    a) Most content will be used as rendered according to specification.
       This means that in general, users will not read CSS style sheets
       or scripts, but will experience their effects after processing.

    b) 2.1 also requires a source view for viewing unprocessed content,
       because there are cases where that is the only way for the user
       to get information.

  3) It is possible to claim conformance for a user agent that doesn't
  feature a source view in conjunction with Notepad. [I don't mean to
  pick on Notepad <grin> - I mean any source-viewing tool here.] There
  is no requirement in UAAG 1.0 that the two pieces of software must be
  "integrated" to satisfy the requirements of the document.

  So, I propose making the document source view requirement more
  explicit in the checkpoint:


   - Ian

  [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0364
  [2] http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#394
  [3] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-20001229/



-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
until 6 January 2001 at:
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Saturday, 6 January 2001 20:05:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:38 GMT