- From: James Craig <wai-ig@cookiecrook.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 22:27:36 -0500
- To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
- Cc: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
List of errors, comments, and suggestions ordered by draft section.
Please let me know if I can present this in a form more-easily-digested
than plain text. Replying to my main email (listed on my site) will get
quicker response than this account used for the public WAI-IG list.
Thanks,
James Craig
<http://cookiecrook.com/>
---
Status of this Doc section, second para. Guidelines spelled "guielines."
Introduction, Section 3. Is this where Wendy wanted to use the examples
from the AIR training materials?
Conformance Claims, Editorial Notes, bulleted list. Is the "claim" of
conformance really this big a deal? Is the "+" enough of an incentive
for some? Have you had requests for this? I think the claim of A+ and
AA+ are fine, but A+n is getting out of hand. Just my two cents.
Guideline 1.1, Level 3 Success Criteria... I thought of some good
examples for this. Full description of a fine art piece could even
include explanation of artist's intention or emotion; something that may
not even be obvious to non-disabled users. Also, check out the Goats
comic strip: <http://www.goats.com/archive/?info=on>. The markup is not
accessible, but the would-be data table does a great job of explaining
the individual panels. Given accessible markup, it would be a great
example of this checkpoint.
Guideline 1.1, Example 1... Agent-specific description here: "by adding
the word link or changing the synthesizer's voice." This should be
changed to something like, "a method determined by the user agent."
Guideline 1.1, Example 5... This could also include a longer description
that explained the score, or perhaps an MML file.
Guideline 1.2, Level 1 Success Criteria, item 4... Erroneous line break
here just before "real-time" noticed in print version. Might be a fluke
or strange print media style. Can't seem to reproduce it now.
Guideline 1.2, Example 3... Why wouldn't a synchronized "descriptive
audio" track be required for a silent animation?
Guideline 1.3, Level 1 Success Criteria, item 1a... fourth bullet
labeled "associations between table cells and their headers" should
probably explicitly state "data table cells." I realize that this is
only legitimate use for a table cell, but for legacy's sake, I think the
extra detail will help and can't hurt.
Guideline 1.3, Examples, Editorial note... How are these HTML-specific?
Is seems that tables and forms are pretty standard in non-HTML forms, too.
Guideline 1.3, Example 2... This one needs some rephrasing using the
"simplest language appropriate." (grin)
Guideline 1.5, Who Benefits... Would recommend adding "or other
background sounds" to the end of this sentence. This applies to more
than just "music."
Guideline 2.1, Level 1 Success Criteria... Why is the middle clause in
there? Could this sentence just be, "All of the functionality of the
content is operable through a keyboard or keyboard interface."? Also,
the following list of three "notes" should be an ordered list (lower
alpha) to remain consistent with rest of document.
Guideline 2.1, Level 2 Success Criteria... Could this give examples of
"more abstract" event handlers or a table comparing some?
Guideline 2.1, Example 2, first bullet... The parenthesized portion is
redundant and should be removed.
Guideline 2.2, Level 1 Success Criteria, Number 1, second bullet... How
was the "at least ten times" decided?
Guideline 2.2, Examples, bullet 1.4... Typo: "after" spelled "ater."
Guideline 2.4, Level 2 Success Criteria, Number 1... "look or sound
different" regulates design style. This may not be the realm of WCAG.
Given the HTML example, do different structural elements like an h4 and
a table caption /need/ to "look" different? What about acronym and abbr?
This should not be required in all cases. Perhaps this could be
rephrased to "sufficiently different for perception as needed."
Guideline 2.4, Level 3 Success Criteria, Numbers 1 and 2... Can examples
be provided for these two? I'm not sure what is being requested.
Guideline 2.4, Level 3 Success Criteria, Number 3, Editorial Note...
Testable by a script or human? Is this a matter of opinion what
constitutes logical?
Guideline 2.4, Level 3 Success Criteria, Number 4e... Can example be
provided?
Guideline 2.4, Example 2... How would this scalable image of a bicycle
be spoken through a reader?
Guideline 2.4, Example 5... "different, more formal voice" should be
left up to the user agent or content author to decide what style is
appropriate. Perhaps this could be rephrased "discernibly different style."
Guideline 2.4, Level 2 Success Criteria, Number 2... Why does a Level 2
criterion require a Level 1 criterion be met. Shouldn't it also require
Level 2?
Guideline 3.1, Level 2 Success Criteria, Numbers 2 and 3... How can
pronunciations and idioms be programmatically determined? Do you have an
example or is there another standard to research?
Guideline 3.1, Level 3 Success Criteria, Number 2... Does context not
count to determine the meaning of the word?
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note... All of these bullet points should be
complete sentences, not clauses. For example, bullet 1.1 should be
"Organize" not "Organizing." This problem goes all the way through the
end of the editor's note and occurs occasionally throughout the
document. Search for "ing"...
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, In general, bullet 2..."Using a style
manual" should probably be "Using a writing style manual," as the word
"style" has several implied meanings in this WCAG document. Perhaps
suggest titles such as "The Elements of Style" by Strunk and White or
"The Chicago Manual of Style."
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, Vocab, bullet 1.3... Typo: erroneous
comma after "languages."
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, Syntax, bullet 2... "bulleted or
numbered" list here implies style. This should be "order or unordered
lists" or perhaps just "lists."
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, Nouns/pronouns, bullet 1... "Use single
nouns or short noun phrases." What? Where? Surely this isn't appropriate
all the time.
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, Nouns/pronouns, bullet 2... Period
missing at end of sentence. Also, "example" should be capitalized.
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, Verbs... If this bullet is missing
content, should it be removed?
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, Tenses, bullet 1, second sentence... The
opening parenthesis should be after "in the first sentence" not before it.
Guideline 3.1, Editorial Note, Logic and relationships... This whole
section seems unnecessary.
Guideline 3.1, bullet 7... "Sounds, graphics, videos and animations"
should have a comma after "videos" to remain consistent with rest of
document and with published writing style guidelines.
Guideline 3.1, Example 1... As far as I know, W3C should be marked as an
abbreviation, not an acronym. Also, pronunciation should be left to the
user agent or author styles. Most real acronyms *should* be pronounced
as words: such as ZIP, AIR, or NATO. Other abbreviations, such as W3C,
HTML, Thurs., FedEx, and even etc. should sometimes be spoken as
letters, sometimes be spoken as real words, and sometimes the
abbreviations should be fully expanded.
Guideline 3.1, Examples, suggestion for number 8... What about various
interpretations of the word "design": graphic, software, electrical,
project, interior, etc. Lexical ambiguity comes up all the time.
Guideline 3.2, Editorial Note... For replacement of the word "page," how
about "document" or "resource?"
Guideline 3.2, Level 2 Success Criteria, number 1... Does "in the same
sequence" account for sub-level navigation that can change? For example,
depending on a site's current section, there may be an expanded sub-nav:
* Home
* Products
* About us
In the "products" section, this could change to:
* Home
* Products
* Software
* Hardware
* About us
Currently the wording does not seem to account for this.
Guideline 3.2, Level 3 Success Criteria, number 4... Can an example be
provided?
Guideline 4.1, Level 1 Success Criteria, number 1... This rule allows
slop tag-soup. Even backwards-compatible sites can use older DTDs.
Violations of specifications should not be encouraged or condoned.
Guideline 4.1, Level 3 Success Criteria... This ought to be Level 2
Success Criteria.
Guideline 4.1, Example 2... "elements designed for applying stylistic
and presentational characteristics"? Like font and bold tags? No. This
should should be rephrased "elements devoid of semantic meaning" like
span. Check out arguments against this on Matt May's site and my own site:
http://www.bestkungfu.com/archive/?id=471
http://cookiecrook.com/2004/05/#cc108387135135169014
Guideline 4.2... How is the term "user interfaces" used here different
from any other web content? A UI is part of the web content and should
therefore be held to the same rules as any other web content, right?
Guideline 4.2, Who Benefits, bullet 1.1... This seems like, "Those who
do this will have an easier time doing this." Is this redundant?
Guideline 4.2, Example 2... Why encourage duality? Separate but equal?
Not likely.
Glossary, functionality... I don't agree with the wording of the first
sentence. Functionality is not the purpose, but how the purpose is achieved.
Glossary, marked in way that the user can access prior to its
appearance, bullet 3... What is meant by "provocative" information? What
exactly would that information provoke?
Glossary, non-text content... images used as list bullets should count
as style, not content, right? Also, is there an example of "any text
that cannot be translated into Unicode?"
Glossary, technology... List not conforming to published writing style
guides. First items should have commas, last item should have a period,
and "or" should be after second bullet. Also, "application" should be
capitalized.
A technology is a
* markup or programming language,
* Application Programming Interface (API), or
* communication protocol.
Glossary, time-dependent presentation... Erroneous capitalization on the
word, "or" after first bullet.
Appendix C, first bulleted list... Should contain the word "and" after
the second-to-last bullet. Sentence leading up to that list is awkward.
Perhaps the phrase, "when it eventually becomes a W3C Recommendation"
should be removed.
Appendix C, first numbered list... Commas after all of these phrases,
period on the last one, and the word "and" at the end of item 5.
Appendix C (and throughout document)... Look at the lists in Appendix C.
There is no reason (apparent to me) why one is a bulleted list and the
other is a numbered list. This same list inconsistency is demonstrated
throughout the document.
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2004 12:03:25 UTC