RE: [WCAG2 TECHS] i18n comment: Direction of text

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-i18n-core-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of ishida@w3.org
> Sent: 27 June 2006 19:47
> To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: [WCAG2 TECHS] i18n comment: Direction of text
> 
> 
> Comment from the i18n review of:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/
> 
> Comment 1
> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-wcag2-techniques/
> Editorial/substantive: S
> Owner: RI
> 
> Location in reviewed document:
>  H55, H56
> 
> Comment: 
> It is not clear to us why correct support of the 'direction 
> of the text' is an accessibility issue. We recommend that you 
> remove all mention of text direction from this document.
> 
> 
> This would include F5, H1, H34, H56, H55
> 
> 
> (If you disagree with this recommendation, we will come back 
> to you with a substantial number of additional comments based 
> on the content of this document related to text direction, 
> and probably recommend that i18n WG needs to be involved in 
> drafting that text. For now we will hold all such comments 
> until this one is addressed.)

=================================
> From: Loretta Guarino Reid [mailto:lorettaguarino@google.com]
> Sent: 18 May 2007 00:42
> To: Richard Ishida
> Cc: public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org
> Subject: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Draft of April
> 2006 (1 of 2)

> Comment 12:

> ----------------------------
> Response from Working Group:
> ----------------------------
> 
> Thank you for pointing out that the direction of text is not 
> an accessibility issue. As long as the text itself is 
> presented in reading order, text direction just affects the 
> rendering. We are removing general requirements for 
> indicating the direction of text, but retaining several 
> techniques for SC 1.3.3, to ensure that the reading order of 
> the text is not compromised to achieve the desired visual 
> effect. We would welcome collaboration from i18n on those 
> portions of the document.
> 
> We made the following modifications to How to Meet SC 3.1.1
> - Removed the second paragraph of the Intent Section
> - Removed Situation A and Situation B , keeping the Situation 
> A sufficient technique as the only sufficient technique for SC 3.1.1.
> - Removed the section and technique for identifying text 
> direction in HTML
> - Removed the advisory CSS technique
> - Removed Example 2
> - Removed the common failure
> 
> We made the following modifications to How to Meet SC 1.3.3
> - Removed "Adding the dir attribute to a block level element 
> to change its directionality" from HTML techniques
> - Removed advisory CSS technique "Specifying the direction of text"
> - Removed "and the direction is identified as right-to-left" 
> from Example 2
> 
> We have also incorporated the following edits:
> - Deleted technique H1: Adding the dir attribute to a block 
> level element to change its directionality
> - Deleted technique H55: Using the dir attribute of the html element
> - deleted F5: Failure of SC 3.1.1 due to using CSS styling to 
> control directionality in XHTML/HTML
> - removed SC 3.1.2 from referenced SC list for techniques H34, H56



Thank you. The i18n Core WG is satisfied by this.

We will, however, send some comments on H34 and H56 separately.


============
Richard Ishida
Internationalization Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
 
http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
http://www.w3.org/International/
http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2007 09:55:16 UTC