W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Action 712 (fast)

From: Simon Harper <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 07:43:12 +0100
Message-ID: <4F867980.5040103@manchester.ac.uk>
To: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
CC: WAI-ua <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Yes, 'A' is my preference.

Si.

PS I check my email at 08:00 and 17:00 GMT. If you require a faster response please include the word 'fast' in the subject line.

=======================
Simon Harper
http://simon.harper.name/about/card/

University of Manchester (UK)
Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
http://wel.cs.manchester.ac.uk


On 11/04/12 22:08, Jim Allan wrote:
> Si,
> are you wanting A or AAA. I think A from your previous emails. Just
> wanting to clarify.
>
> Jim
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Simon Harper
> <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>  wrote:
>> Also fine for me - but not the AA.
>>
>>
>> Si.
>>
>> PS I check my email at 08:00 and 17:00 GMT. If you require a faster response
>> please include the word 'fast' in the subject line.
>>
>> =======================
>> Simon Harper
>> http://simon.harper.name/about/card/
>>
>> University of Manchester (UK)
>> Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
>> http://wel.cs.manchester.ac.uk
>>
>>
>> On 11/04/12 18:30, Jeanne Spellman wrote:
>>> The grammar is a little awkward.  I would propose:
>>>
>>> Delete 1.2.1&  1.2.2
>>>
>>> Add:
>>> 1.2.X Provide Available Information: If missing or empty alternative
>>> content or associations are recognized, the user agent will notify the user
>>> and provide a mechanism to relate all available metadata to the user upon
>>> request. (Level AA)
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Existing:
>>> 1.2.1 Repair Missing Alternatives:
>>>
>>> The user can specify whether or not the user agent should generate and
>>> render repair text (e.g. file name) when it recognizes that the author has
>>> not provided alternative content. (Level A) @@ 712
>>>
>>> 1.2.2 Repair Empty Alternatives:
>>>
>>> The user can specify whether or not the user agent should generate and
>>> render repair text (e.g. file name) when it recognizes that the author has
>>> provided empty alternative content. (Level AAA) @@ 712
>>>
>>> 1.2.3 Repair Missing Associations:
>>>
>>> The user can specify whether or not the user agent should attempt to
>>> predict associations from author-specified presentation attributes (i.e.
>>> position and appearance). (Level AAA) ## DONE TPAC
>>>
>>> 1.2.4 Broken Alternative Content:
>>>
>>> The user can be notified when the user agent cannot render alternative
>>> content (e.g. when captions are broken). (Level AAA)## DONE 5 April 2012
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/11/2012 10:32 AM, Jim Allan wrote:
>>>> Jan,
>>>> I think you've captured it.
>>>> The level from 1.2.x from Simon's emails is more than AAA. On a basic
>>>> level (missing alts, mismatched or missing label/id) this is
>>>> implementable. I am sure there are more complex
>>>> alternatives/associations with HTML or other technologies. I can live
>>>> with AA level. I agree that there is little likely hood of anyone
>>>> complying with 1.2.x at AAA.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Richards, Jan<jrichards@ocadu.ca>
>>>>   wrote:
>>>>> Hi Simon,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the list of changes...but what would be most helpful is a
>>>>> listing of the actual final proposed SCs. My guess from your emails is that
>>>>> the 4 SCs currently in GL1.2 will be replaced by just these two:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.2.3 Repair Missing Associations: The user can specify whether or not
>>>>> the user agent should attempt to predict associations from author-specified
>>>>> presentation attributes (i.e. position and appearance). (Level AAA) ## DONE
>>>>> TPAC
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.2.X HANDLE ???: In situations where missing or empty alternative
>>>>> content or associations can be identified, and when those elements achieve
>>>>> focus, the user agent will notify the user, and provide a mechanism to
>>>>> relate all available metadata to the user, upon their request. Thereby,
>>>>> enabling the user to take appropriate alternative action. Level???
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> (Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc.
>>>>> jrichards@ocadu.ca | 416-977-6000 ext. 3957 | fax: 416-977-9844
>>>>> Inclusive Design Research Centre (IDRC) | http://idrc.ocad.ca/
>>>>> Faculty of Design | OCAD University
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Simon Harper [mailto:simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk]
>>>>>> Sent: April 11, 2012 3:00 AM
>>>>>> To: Richards, Jan
>>>>>> Cc: UAWG list
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Action 712
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Jan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So let me try and simplify:
>>>>>> 1) I think 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 are redundant - no one will implement them
>>>>>> at AAA,
>>>>>> and technology isn't really good enough just yet; but we should present
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> information we have (the information we would have to present to the
>>>>>> computational algorithm for it to try and repair) to the user.
>>>>>> 2) lets remove both 1.2.1 and 1.2.2.
>>>>>> 3) 1.2.4 seems good but needs extending with the remnants of 1.2.1 and
>>>>>> 1.2.2 so that it presents the information (the information we would
>>>>>> have to
>>>>>> present to the computational algorithm - 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 - for it to
>>>>>> try and
>>>>>> repair) too.
>>>>>> 4) 1.2.3 is aspirational and seems OK - it's not much possible right
>>>>>> now but
>>>>>> we've agreed it so it's fine. I think 1.2.3 gets applied first and then
>>>>>> (1.2.1+.2+.4) my suggestion when 1.2.3 fails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd also say my suggestion could be applied in the case of a missing
>>>>>> association too - in that we recognize something is missing, the user
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> notified, if they ask for it the (form field, say) information is
>>>>>> provided to
>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this clarify?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Si.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PS I check my email at 08:00 and 17:00 GMT. If you require a faster
>>>>>> response
>>>>>> please include the word 'fast' in the subject line.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>> Simon Harper
>>>>>> http://simon.harper.name/about/card/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> University of Manchester (UK)
>>>>>> Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
>>>>>> http://wel.cs.manchester.ac.uk
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/04/12 18:55, Richards, Jan wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Simon,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is a lot going on in your message. Can you please list all of
>>>>>>> the success
>>>>>> criteria that would be present in your rewording of Guideline 1.2?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2012 06:43:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 12 April 2012 06:43:43 GMT