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

[Published] 14 July 2001 UAAG 1.0 Guidelines and Techniques

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 13:41:38 -0400
Message-ID: <3B508452.9165E7E7@w3.org>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Hello,

I've published the 14 July 2001 revisions of the 
UAAG 1.0 Guidelines [1] and Techniques [2]. Changes [3]
are on the Web and listed below.

The primary changes in this draft involved:

 1) Moving normative material from checkpoint notes into
   the checkpoints themselves. I don't believe that this
   changed our intentions at all, but I want to highlight it.
   I reviewed the document for normative information in the Notes
   based on comments from the SVG WG.

 2) Changes to checkpoints 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 10.2, and 10.4 to refer
   to font and color "services". This was based on a resolution
   about checkpoint 4.1 at the 12 July teleconference, but the
   change should apply to all of these checkpoints (for 
   consistency).

 3) New definitions of audio/image/animation in conjunction with
   some new statements in the section on content type
   labels. These changes attempt to make it clearer that our
   requirements refer to coherent media objects that can be
   played indpendently, and is an attempt to resolve issue 517
   based on discussion at the 12 July teleconference.


 4) I've reorganized the conformance section and tried to
   emphasize the key conformance concepts that the SVG WG
   did not seem to understand. I hope that this version
   makes clearer the ideas of conditional conformance, 
   modular conformance (by components working together), 
   and applicability.
   

 5) I introduced the "rendered content" label per the 12
   July teleconference. Having done this, I'm not entirely
   satisfied with the results: this is a step in the
   right direction but doesn't quite work for some checkpoints. 
   I think I know how to improve the for content/for rendered
   content/for user agent features/for both labels, and will
   think about this for the next draft. The current change
   and future refinements should not be considered substantial
   changes to the requirements of the document. 

I believe that this draft is very close to being what will
become the Candidate Recommendation draft.

 - Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-20010714/
[2] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-TECHS-20010714/
[3] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/wai-ua-wd-changes.html#WD-UAAG10-20010714

------------------------------------
Changes since the 22 June 2001 draft

General

 * Important: Based on comments from SVG WG, reviewed all Notes after
   checkpoints and moved to checkpoints:
      + Any sufficient technique.
      + Any exemptions.
 * Incorporated editorial comments from Richard Premack:
 * Incorporated some editorial suggestions from Harvey Bingham.
 * Based on some comments from Tantek Çelik, changed "specification"
   to "format specification" for clarity in some places (so that it
   would not be confused with "specified by the author").
 * Refer to "synthesized speech" instead of "speech", per 12 July
   teleconference.
 * Based on input from the WG, edited the summary to include more
   scenarios and fewer checkpoints/guidelines examples.

Introduction

 * Use "stakeholder" per comments from Richard Premack.
 * Edits to section on limits of document about output modalities.
   Don't apologize for synthesized speech requirements.

Guidelines

 * Edits to introduction describing checkpoint structure to make
   clear what is normative and informative.

Checkpoints

 * Per 12 July teleconference, integrated "rendered content"
   label in addition to "all content" label. Editor's note: Having
   integrated this label, I am not entirely satisfied with the
   results and may propose something that will be easier to use and
   understand. This is a step in the right direction, however.
 * 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 10.2, 10.4: Per 12 July teleconference, refer
   to "font services", "text decoration services", and "color
   services". For 4.1, incorporated "cascade" so that font services
   are required first, otherwise text drawing services. Note that the
   WG did not agree to this type of change to the other checkpoints
   (just 4.1), but I made this change to all of these checkpoints for
   the sake of consistency. I do not believe this changes there
   meaning in any way.
 * 6.4: Added note that alert of changes does not refer to style,
   only content. This clarification has not yet been approved by the
   working group. Refer to proposal from Ian.

Conformance

 * Important Edited based on comments from SVG WG. This version puts
   the most important conformance concepts up front, to avoid
   confusion.
 * Added a statement that some checkpoints may not benefit some users
   for some content, but are expected to benefit many users for
   general purpose content. This was added based on SVG comments that
   suggested that some requirements shouldn't be included in the
   document because they didn't help users all the time.
 * Added comment per Richard Premack observation that components may
   reside on a server.
 * Tried to make sure that all requirements are either stated in
   checkpoints, or things referred to from checkpoints, or in the
   details clauses of the conformance section.
 * Added to image/animation/audio/video content type labels
   information about requirements applying to media objects that may
   be rendered independently and coherently according to
   specification.
 * Per 12 July teleconference, added statement that when a UA
   runs in more than one OE, the user should consider several factors
   in choosing which conventions to follow.

Glossary

 * Important To address issue 517, added definitions of "image"
   and "audio", and edited definition of "animation" (see also
   requirements added to content type labels). The point of this
   change was to define these terms such that they refer to atomic
   media objects that can be played on their own. Thus, the
   requirements of the document apply to those media objects that may
   be played independently. Refer to discussion at the 12 July
   teleconference.

Techniques

 * Per comments from SVG WG, removed incorrect CSS example from
   checkpoint about outline view.

-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Cell:                    +1 917 450-8783
Received on Saturday, 14 July 2001 13:42:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:58 GMT