Re: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Working Draft of December, 2007

Hi Makoto,

In follow-up to our phone conversation here is a summary of the information
on the two issues that were still open (2544 and 2547).

Regarding 2544 - SC 1.4.5 IMAGES OF TEXT
 - I understand now that your concern now was not so much with the exception
but with the fact that there was a concern that the exception was hard to do
- and in Japan there is poor style sheet support and it is necessary to
create images of text in order to get things to look as intended.   
As we discussed provision SC 1.4.5 starts with the phrase " If the
technologies being used can achieve the visual presentation...".  If style
sheets (or any other technology that an author is using) will not allow the
author to achieve the visual presentation, then the provision is met without
having to use text.    However for SC 1.4.8 (Images of Text (No Exception))
at Level AAA there is no such exception or condition. 


Regarding 2547  Accessibility Support
 - We agree that this is an essential component and more information is
needed.  As part of the candidate recommendation (CR) stage we will be
working with implementers to gather such information.   The purpose of the
CR stage is to gather just such information.   We look forward to working
with you on gathering accessibility support information for Japanese screen
readers.

Please let us know if there are any outstanding issues at this point.

Thank you. 
 

Gregg Vanderheiden
Co-Chair

 

> > (Issue ID: 2544)
> > Status: VERIFIED / ACCEPTED
> > ----------------------------
> > Original Comment:
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > We need to clarify the intent of this SC. In the first bullet, it 
> > reads "Customizable: The image of text can be visually 
> customized to 
> > the user's requirements;". What do you mean by "visually 
> customized"?
> > Does it include all of the following?:
> >
> > - Font family
> > - Font weight
> > - Font color
> > - Font size
> >
> > Proposed Change:
> > Need more clarification on what "visually customized" means.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > Response from Working Group:
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >
> > We have added the following definition as you requested.
> >
> > visually customized
> >  the font, size, color, and background can be set
> >
> > We have also added the following example to Understanding 1.4.5:
> >
> > Customizable font settings in images of text A Web site 
> allows users 
> > to specify font settings and all images of text on the site 
> are then 
> > provided based on those settings.
> 
> 
> Could you show us the concrete/real example or provide URI of 
> the examples?
> We are still not sure how to allow users to customize all 
> image of text on the web page.
> 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Comment 4: How to create the documented lists
> > Source: 
> > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2008Feb/009
> > 7.html




> > (Issue ID: 2547)
> > Status: VERIFIED / PARTIAL/OTHER
> > ----------------------------
> > Original Comment:
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > Thank you for providing the detailed information on 
> "Documented lists 
> > of Web technologies with Accessibility Support". However, We still 
> > couldn't understand how to create the lists. Will the WCAG 
> WG provide 
> > the test files and/or the common forms of documentation? We 
> won't be 
> > able to create the lists for Japanese without those 
> materials. Also it 
> > would be the same for any other languages. There should be the 
> > consistency for the documentation among the languages. 
> International 
> > companies could be annoyed if the documented lists for different 
> > languages would differ in quality.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > Response from Working Group:
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >
> > The working group recognizes that the need for information on which 
> > technologies are 'accessibility-supported' is important to 
> use of the 
> > guidelines.
> >
> > Such data can only come from testing different versions of 
> user agents 
> > and assistive technology and recording whether the features of the 
> > technology are supported. We expect that this information 
> may need to 
> > be compiled from multiple sources. WAI will be working with 
> others to 
> > establish an approach for collecting information on the 
> accessibility 
> > support of various technologies by different user agents 
> and assistive 
> > technologies.
> >
> > WCAG 2.0 is still in development. We expect that during Candidate 
> > Recommendation period we will have some initial information on 
> > accessibility supported technologies, to demonstrate how 
> this approach 
> > will work once WCAG 2.0 becomes a W3C Recommendation.
> >
> > The Candidate Recommendation process itself requires that there be 
> > examples that demonstrate conformance. So there will 
> certainly be some 
> > information about accessibility supported technologies in 
> order to get 
> > out of the candidate recommendation stage for WCAG 2.0.
> 
> 
> Keep this as an open issue.
> How to create the documented lists is one of the most 
> important issue on WCAG 2.0. We are still not sure how it 
> could be done in different languages/countries.

Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 23:56:26 UTC