W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: Teleconference for 5 October 2006

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:56:50 -0400
Message-ID: <45251D32.1050703@utoronto.ca>
To: jimallan@tsbvi.edu
CC: WAU-ua <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>

Hi Jim,

I can join the call today only until 2:30pm.

Here are my thoughts on 7.1-7.4:

------

First, on a few calls I have mentioned how things are done in the ATAG 
2.0 draft and I'll continue that here. One important point in terms of 
WAI-wide integration is that we use the following WCAG-like organization 
of ATAG's tool-UI related guidelines:

"
Guideline A.1: Authoring Tool User Interface must be Perceivable
Guideline A.2: Authoring Tool User Interface must be Operable
Guideline A.3: Authoring Tool User Interface must be Understandable
Guideline A.4: Authoring Tool User Interface must be Access System Friendly
"

Regarding 7.1-7.4, ATAG 2.0 covers the topic at a higher level with the 
following checkpoint:

A.3.1 For the authoring tool user interface, observe the accessibility 
conventions of the platform. [Priority 2]

Success Criteria:
- Focus and selection conventions for the current platform (specified in 
the conformance profile) must be followed.
- Keyboard accessibility configuration conventions (e.g., default 
accelerator key bindings) for the platform (specified in the conformance 
profile) must be followed.



UAAG 7.1 Respect focus and selection conventions (P1)
- the "mutual exclusive of 7.3" is confusing (the techniques are all the 
same). I'm guessing it's because the group wanted to require 7.3 but 
felt it was too onerous made it a P2 and then broke out a few P1 things 
as most important?
- requirements covered by ATAG 2.0 checkpoint pasted above.

UAAG 7.2 Respect input configuration conventions (P1)
- looks ok except this example technique ("Clearly document any default 
configurations that depart from operating environment conventions.") 
appears to undermine it.
- ATAG 2.0 requires something similar in checkpoint pasted above.

UAAG 7.3 Respect operating environment conventions (P2)
- this is quite a major requirement since the "that benefit 
accessibility" clause could probably be read to cover pretty much 
everything.
- ATAG 2.0 does not go this far.

UAAG 7.4 Provide input configuration indications (P2)
- this is good - but could it be rolled into 7.2 since "indications" are 
  often part of input conventions?
- ATAG 2.0 had this elsewhere as a P3, but in thinking about it, I just 
sent a message to that list proposing it move to P1.

------

Cheers,
Jan








Jim Allan wrote:
> W3C User Agent Teleconference for 5 October 2006
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Chair: Jim Allan
> Date: Thursday, 5 October 2006
> Time: 2:00-3:00 pm Boston Local Time, USA (19:00-20:00 UTC/GMT)
> Call-in: Zakim bridge at: +1-617-761-6200, code 8294#
> IRC: sever: irc.w3.org, port: 6665, channel: #ua.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Please send RSVP or additional agenda items to the list.
> 
> Agenda Action Items
> 
> 
> 	1. Review of UAAG techniques for checkpoints 7.1 - 7.4 (all are related to
> observing operating environment conventions) for currency and relevance.
> submit suggested deletions, improvements, additions to the list.
> 
> 
> Jim Allan, Webmaster & Statewide Technical Support Specialist
> Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
> 1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
> voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9264  http://www.tsbvi.edu/
> ---> Share to Win!! <---
> 
> 

-- 
Jan Richards, M.Sc.
User Interface Design Specialist
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
Faculty of Information Studies
University of Toronto

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2006 14:58:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:51:37 GMT