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

RE: Minutes from User Agent Teleconference for February 15 2007

From: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:00:09 -0600
To: Peter Parente <pparent@us.ibm.com>, Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Cc: WAI-UA list <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>, w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org
Message-id: <HDEAKIPKOHBCMDILOOPNKEBIHKAB.jimallan@tsbvi.edu>

Thanks for this Peter.
I especially like the "base user agent, its internal extensions, or external
assistive technologies", a useful delineation.
I agree. The structure of the document (UAAG2) should mirror WCAG and ATAG
and provide high level constructs. When we get to the details and specific
requirement using the MVC concepts would be useful. And, may provide
language to help us clearly write the guidelines so they are meaningful to
developers.

Jim

>
> Assuming the response to my last email is to "follow ATAG and WCAG"
> instead of introducing new MVC terminology, here is my bullet with some
> initial definitions.
>
> 1d) Align the structure of the document with the one used in ATAG 2.0 and
> WCAG 2.0 by splitting requirements into the perceivable, operable,
> understandable, and access system friendly categories.
>
> perceivable: able to be noticed by a user through one or more renderings
> provided by the base user agent, its internal extensions, or external
> assistive technologies
> operable: able to be manipulated by a user through one or more input
> devices recognized by the base user agent, its internal extensions, or
> external assistive technologies
> understandable: able to be apprehended by a user through one or more
> intelligible renderings provided by the base user agent, its internal
> extensions, or external assistive technologies
> access system friendly: able to be viewed and controlled programmatically
> by internal extensions to the base user agent and external assistive
> technologies using standard APIs (e.g. DOM, MSAA, AT-SPI, UA, UIA)
>
> Even if we don't mention MVC, it might still be a useful tool for
> thinking
> about the requirements.
>
> Pete
Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 22:10:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:35 UTC