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

Hi Gregg,

Thanks very much for the notes.
Now, I confirmed that all of our concerns are addressed and/or solved.
Please close the two issues.

At CR stage, I'll work on gathering accessibility support information
for Japanese screen readers.

Thanks again for your call.

JIS Working Group
Makoto Ueki


2008/4/16, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>:
> 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 Wednesday, 16 April 2008 00:06:23 UTC