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

Responses to Earl Johnson issues raised during second last call of UAAG 1.0

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 19:20:54 -0500
Message-ID: <3AB2ADE6.3BA505BE@w3.org>
To: Earl.Johnson@eng.sun.com
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org

Please find below a summary of how the UAWG addressed your last call
issues (383-388, your original comments [0]).

The complete second last call issues list [1] is available
online. The results of the UAWG's resolutions have been
incorporated into the 9 March 2001 draft of the document [2].

  NOTE: The issue titles relate to the 23 October 2000 last call
  draft [4]. In my comments below, checkpoint numbers, etc. have
  been updated to correspond to the 9 March 2001 draft.

Please indicate whether you are satisfied with the UAWG's
resolutions, whether you wish the WG to carry forward
any objections to the Director as the document advances, or
whether you require further clarification or comment.
Refer to section 5.5.2 of the 8 February 2001 W3C Process
Document [3] for information about requirements to formally
address issues prior to advancing to last call.

On behalf of the UAWG, thank you for your review and

 - Ian

[0] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0295
[1] http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-20010309/
[3] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010208/tr.html#last-call
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-UAAG10-20001023/

The UAWG disagreed with you on the following:

#385: Add requirement that component size increases when objects
contained increase size? (your comment about checkpoint 4.1 and
your comment about UI checkpoints under Guideline 4):

  Comment: The Working Group resolved not to include a general
  resize requirement in UAAG 1.0. There is a resize requirement
  for visually rendered text. This is now clearly stated in
  section 1.3: "Known limitations of this document."

#388: Checkpoint 9.7: Raise priority to P1 

  Comment: This is now checkpoint 11.5. The Working Group has
  discussed this issue in the past, and while we understand that this
  feature is highly desirable, it would not impede someone from using
  the user agent, although it may be difficult to use if the user has
  to keep re-configuring.

The UAWG adopted your suggestion:

#383: Checkpoint 3.2: Add definition of "placeholder"

  Comment: Done.

#384: Editorial Checkpoint 3.3: Add an example of stock quote ticker 

  Comment: This was not done yet, but will be added as an example
  in the next draft. Please note that the WG confirmed that control
  of animated text effects caused by scripts is not part of this

#386: Checkpoint 5.4: Move example to Note 

  Comment: Done. This is now checkpoint 6.4. Also note that
  this is not a UI or content checkpoint; it's a communication
  through an API checkpoint.

The UAWG answered the following questions:

#387: Checkpoint 8.4: Where do labels come from? XML/HTML? 
      [You wrote checkpoint 8.5]

  Comment: What is now checkpoint 10.4 states more clearly
  that the labels come from the format specifications. The
  checkpoint and Note read:

   "10.4 Make available to the user an "outline" view of content,
   composed of labels for important structural elements (e.g., heading
   text, table titles, form titles, etc.). [Priority 2]

     Note: This checkpoint is meant to provide the user with a
     simplified view of content (e.g, a table of contents). What
     constitutes a label is defined by a markup language
     specification. For example, in HTML, a heading (H1-H6) is a label
     for the section that follows it, a CAPTION is a label for a
     table, the "title" attribute is a label for its element, etc. A
     label is not required to be text only. For important elements
     that do not have associated labels, user agents may generate
     labels for the outline view. For information about what
     constitutes the set of important structural elements, please see
     the Note following checkpoint 9.9. By making the outline view
     navigable, it is possible to satisfy this checkpoint and
     checkpoint 9.9 together: Allow users to navigate among the
     important elements of the outline view, and to navigate from a
     position in the outline view to the corresponding position in a
     full view of content."

The UAWG did not address these questions directly:

About checkpoint 2.3: This checkpoint (and much of Guideline 2) have 
been revised, so I believe that your recommended rewording is no
longer applicable. However, you are invited to read checkpoint 2.3
to see if it satisfies your request. Please note that the Working
Group has not given any of the four rendering options preference: any
one of the four will satisfy the checkpoint.

About checkpoint 2.5 (now checkpoint 2.7): Refer to recent
proposal about minimum requirements for repair, not yet adopted:

About checkpoint 4.11: One answer to your question is that, according
to checkpoint 1.3, any non-text message through the user interface
must have a text equivalent in the user interface. Does this answer
your question/satisfy you? 

We did not add a requirement that when the user has turned the volume
to silent (enabled by checkpoint 4.9), there must be a non-audio
signal when the audio has stopped playing. Please indicate whether you
wish to pursue this request for a new requirement.

Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Friday, 16 March 2001 19:20:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:29 UTC