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

WCAG Perceivable review

From: Peter Parente <pparent@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:15:06 -0400
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF709AC9A3.D13252B9-ON852572FA.0063B3D1-852572FA.00644D8B@us.ibm.com>

I haven't gotten into the guidline explanations in depth yet. These are 
just 
comments about the overview page. 

My notes are formatted according to the following template:

= Some landmark

"Quote taken from the page that I want to discuss."

My notes.

= 1.1

"Provide text alternatives for any non-text content so that it can be 
changed
into other forms people need such as large print, braille, speech, symbols 
or
simpler language"

The "symbols or simpler language" terms don't seem to fit into
the preceivable category. Shouldn't they be in understandable? The rest 
are
talking about modalities while these two talk about syntax changes for 
semantic
understanding.

= 1.1.1

"Media, Test, Sensory: If non-text content is multimedia , live audio-only 
or
live video-only content, a test or exercise that must be presented in 
non-text
format , or primarily intended to create a specific sensory experience , 
then
text alternatives at least identify the non-text content with a 
descriptive
text label. (For multimedia, see also Guideline 1.2.)  #

CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is 
being
accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives that
identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are provided and
alternative forms in different modalities are provided to accommodate 
different
disabilities."

The segement reading "test or exercise ... " of the first bullet above 
seems to
be speaking directly about CAPTCHAs. But then why is CAPTCHAs called out
separately? Why not "a test or exercise that must be presented in non-text
format (e.g. CAPTCHA)" in the first bullet?

= 1.1 Key Terms

"non-text content ... Note: This includes ASCII Art (which is a pattern of 
characters) 
and leetspeak (which is character substitution)."

Minor nit, but ...

Why is leetspeak non-text content? It's parseable like any other language. 
It
just requires a different set of rules. This part of the example is 
misleading.

= 1.3.2

"Meaningful Sequence: When the sequence in which content is presented 
affects
its meaning, a correct reading sequence can be programmatically determined 
and
sequential navigation of interactive components is consistent with that
sequence. (Level A) How to meet 1.3.2"

Again, isn't this understandable, not perceivable? For this topic, I would 
take
perceivable to mean *a* sequence can be programmatically determined and
navigated. The fact that it is "meaningful" and "correct" should fall 
under
understandable.

= 1.3.3

"Size, Shape, Location: Instructions provided for understanding and 
operating
content do not rely on shape, size, visual location, or orientation of
components. (Level A)"

Again, why here? It says the word "understanding" in the guideline. To fit 
in
the perceivable section, this guideline should speak to the shape, size, 
visual
location, and orientation enabling a user to *locate* components for 
further
understanding.

I may have other comments forthcoming. I need more time to dive in.

Peter Parente
pparent@us.ibm.com
Tie: 526-2346
UNC: 919-962-1780
IBM: 919-486-2346
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2007 18:15:27 GMT

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