W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: User Agent Teleconference for June 14 2007

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:32:14 -0400
Message-ID: <466EE6AE.5010905@utoronto.ca>
To: WAU-ua <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>

Hi everyone,

As per my action item from last week, here are some thoughts on the 17 
May 2007 WCAG 2.0 Draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/) from my general 
review:

1. The term "Robust" seems not quite right, though I can't think of a 
single word that is.

2. For the "three levels of conformance" the rationales seem 
insufficient. The key concept seems to be "impact on presentation" where 
presentation is most likely visual presentation. In some cases however, 
the difference actually seems to be more about technical complexity or 
changes to the site a as it might otherwise have been designed. For 
example:
  - Captions (Prerecorded) are level A, while Captions (Live) are level 
AA, but the impact on presentation is the same.
  - Abbreviations (not impact on presentation, but definitely more work)
  - Reading Level (does not really impact the "presentation" as this 
word is usually used)

3. "Accessibility Supported" concept seems ok in terms of UAAG.

4. Maybe should add to 2.1 something about finding out about keyboard 
settings for a Web Page.

5. 2.2.2 Blinking should go somewhere else (2.3 or 1.4)

6. Maybe "2.4.4 Link Purpose (Context)" should just apply if back button 
won't work.

7. Error Prevention - 3.3.3 - maybe Checking and confirming should both 
be mandatory

8. Def: Mechanism: "The mechanism may be explicitly provided in the 
content, or may be relied on to be provided by either the platform or by 
user agents, including assistive technologies."
  - how many user agents, ATs, etc need to provide it before this is ok?
1.4.2 (Audio Turnoff) allows a "mechanism" but 1.4.4 (Resize text) 
doesn't. Is this consistent enough?

9. Def: Technology:
- This is no longer linked to in the main document.
- Why is "API" in the definition? I think it interferes.


Cheers,
Jan



Jim Allan wrote:
> For the WCAG review, for efficient task completion (since I started with
> guideline 1).
> Jim
> 
>>From the May 31 meeting http://www.w3.org/2007/05/31-ua-minutes.html
> 
> ACTION: PP to Review Perceivable principle Guidelines. [1]
> 
> ACTION: CL to Review Operable and Robust principles Guidelines. [2]
> 
> ACTION: JA to Review Understandable principle Guidelines. [3]
> 
> ACTION: JR to Review all principles Guidelines. [4]
> 
>>From June 7 meeting
> ACTION: KF to Will look at Perceivable and Operable Guidelines. [4]
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]On
>> Behalf Of Jim Allan
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:37 AM
>> To: WAU-ua
>> Subject: User Agent Teleconference for June 14 2007
>>
>>
>>
>> W3C User Agent Teleconference for June 14 2007
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> Chair: Jim Allan
>> Date: Thursday, June 14 2007
>> 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#
>> for UK use 44-117.270-6152
>> IRC: sever: irc.w3.org, port: 6665, channel: #ua.
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> 1. Summer meeting schedule (vacations, July 4, other holidays)
>>
>> 2. WCAG 2.0 comments WG seeks feedback on the following points for this
>> draft:
>> from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2007AprJun/0038.html
>>
>>          - Are the guidelines and success criteria clear? If not, can you
>> suggest clearer wording?
>>          - Are there any success criteria that you feel are not
>> implementable or testable? If so, how could they be improved?
>>          - Are there any success criteria that you feel would not improve
>> accessibility as written, or that might hinder it?  If so, how could they
>> be improved?
>>
>> Comments on this Working Draft are due by 29 June 2007
>>
>> 3. update on wiki
>>
>> 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/
>> "We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." McLuhan, 1964
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
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 Tuesday, 12 June 2007 18:35:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:51:42 GMT