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

Re: [Editorial] Two glossary comments

From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 14:32:10 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Changes sound fine to me.

At 02:11 PM 3/28/2001 -0500, Ian Jacobs wrote:
>I finally read the glossary of the 23 March 2001 draft [1].
>I don't have any significant complaints (and will make a few
>minor editorial clarifications in the next draft).
>Two points caught my eye that I wanted to mention to the WG.
>1) The definition of "documentation" reads:
>    "Documentation refers to all information provided
>     by the vendor about a product, including all product
>     manuals, installation instructions, the help system,
>     and tutorials."
>    This sounds too normative to me. Our documentation
>    *requirements* are expressed by Guideline 12. Those
>    five checkpoints make requirements about (1) what must
>    be in the documentation and (2) the accessibility of
>    the documentation.
>    I think the definition needs to be written in a manner
>    that doesn't suggest that it adds requirements (e.g.,
>    that the vendor is required to write tutorials in order
>    to conform).
>    Also "all information provided by the vendor about a product"
>    is far too broad. This might include press releases, TV
>    commercials, etc.
>    As for other features, the claimant may decide to include
>    or exclude different pieces of documentation based on whether
>    they conform. The only *required* documentation is that required
>    by the checkpoints of Guideline 12.
>    Therefore, I propose the following change to the definition:
>    <NEW>
>    "Documentation refers to information that supports the
>     use of a product. This information may be found in product
>     manuals, installation instructions, the help system,
>     tutorials, etc. Documentation may be distributed; it may
>     be delivered on CD-ROM or available on the Web. Refer to
>     Guideline 12 for information about documentation requirements.
>    </NEW>
>2) We define "document source view" but we don't use it
>     in any of the checkpoints. Checkpoint 2.2 says "provide
>     a view of the text source."
>     I propose to leave 2.2 as is and to delete "document source
>     view" from the glossary.
>  - Ian
>[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-20010323/
>Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
>Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
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 Wednesday, 28 March 2001 15:29:15 GMT

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