W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > July 2009

Your Posts to the public list

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:09:44 -0500
Message-Id: <B03C2926-CFA5-4DCB-A2F6-B218A21027F0@trace.wisc.edu>
To: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Dear Chris

We have received a number of comments from you to the Public Comments  
list.

Some of the comments you sent in are related to comments on the  
documents.   These we are processing and will send comments to back to  
you when we have time to review and respond to them (2 are completed  
and are below.  The others will follow as we get to them in queue).

Other comments you sent are not asking about the guidelines but are  
instead requests to comment on or advise you on aspects of pages you  
are writing.  We are not able to respond to these types of inquiries.

The WCAG Public Comments List is for public comments on the WCAG  
documents. Please use this public comment list only to submit errors,  
omissions, issues, or needed clarifications to the documents.  
Suggestions for new techniques should be submitted using the  
Techniques for WCAG 2.0 submission form.

Please note that the public list should not be used to ask questions  
about particular websites or implementation issues. We just don't have  
the ability to respond to these questions.  Questions about how to  
apply WCAG to a particular page or site should be sent
        a) to one of the many consultants working in the area,
        b) to the WAI Interest Group (IG) mailing list (w3c-wai-ig@w3.org 
),
    or c) to one of the many other mailing lists and forums that focus  
on Web accessibility.

Some general comments that may be helpful to you.

1) NOTHING is required that is not specifically required in the WCAG  
2.0 Guidelines.

	- and in the WCAG 2.0 guidelines - the ONLY things required are the  
SUCCESS CRITERIA and the Conformance Requirements that you can find in  
the CONFORMANCE section of WCAG 2.0

2) TECHNIQUES  are NEVER required.      They as simply options that  
you may or may not use to meet the Success criterion in WCAG 2.0

3) Some techniques will conflict with other techniques.  Since neither  
is required this is not a problem.  If two techniques conflict - then  
don't use both.

4) Read the Understanding document carefully to understand the Success  
Criteria.

Thank you for your comments.  We will be responding to the ones that  
are suggesting changes to our documents (edits, errors or  
omissions).   Below are the items that do NOT fall in this category  
and that we are not in a position to address.

Thank You

Gregg and Loretta



YOUR COMMENTS ARE ALL LISTED BELOW  GROUPED INTO THREE CATEGORIES



1) WCAG Questions - Done
These are questions about the WCAG documents that we have answers for.  
And they are provided with each item.  In general however - questions  
are put in queue and will take some time to get to.  (see #3 below)


2) WCAG Questions -  Still in Queue
These are question about the WCAG documents that are in queue for  
discussion by the Working Group.    We will work on them in turn as we  
get to them.  Thank you for your comments.   We will let you know how  
they come out when they are processed.  It may take some time  
depending on other work items.
If you need quicker responses in order to do your work - please check  
with a consultant. They can probably help you to understand the  
guidelines while we work on making the language more understandable in  
our formal docs to be released later this year.

3) Consultant Questions
  These are questions that should be addressed to consultants.  They  
do not fall into the category of things we need to change in the next  
release of the WCAG support documents.



=====================
YOUR COMMENTS
=====================

=============================================================
1) WCAG Questions - Done
These are questions about the WCAG documents that we have answers for.  
And they are provided with each item.  In general however - questions  
are put in queue and will take some time to get to.  (see #3 below)

   From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 20, 2009 11:10:02 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Problem with rule for Visual Presentation

I noticed a problem at the third requirement for Justifcation.

Rule 1 (C19 ) says to align it to the left OR right in CSS
Rule 2 (G172 ) says to remove full justication
Rule 3 (G169) says to Align text on only one side

This can get confusing, Please re-phrase how to meet justificaiton  
requirements for Visual Presentation (1.4.8)

  Response:

They are differing ways to meet the Success Criteria. We feel the  
language is clear. We thing your mistake as that you are thinking that  
every technique must be implementedů We think you may be thinking AND  
instead of ORů

(C19 ) says to align it to the left OR right in CSS
OR
  (G172 ) says to remove full justication
OR
Rule 3 (G169) says to Align text on only one side

================

From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 19, 2009 6:58:30 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Meaningful Sequence: Layout Tables vs. CSS

Please add back in the use of CSS to replace Layout Tables. If you do  
not understand my reason, please look at http://www.mardiros.net/css-layout.html


RESPONSE

The SC allows layout tables as long as they linearize properly.   
Changes to the meaning of the success criteria cannot be added to WCAG  
after it is released.

=============================================================
2) WCAG Questions -  Still in Queue
These are question about the WCAG documents that are in queue for  
discussion by the Working Group.    We will work on them in turn as we  
get to them.  Thank you for your comments.   We will let you know how  
they come out when they are processed.  IIt may take some time  
depending on other work items.
If you need quicker responses in order to do your work - please check  
with a consultant. They can probably help you to understand the  
guidelines while we work on making the language more understandable in  
our formal docs to be released later this year.

From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 28, 2009 9:09:06 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Cc: gv@trace.wisc.edu, lorettaguarino@google.com
Subject: FOCUS ORDER VS. MULTIPLE WAYS VS. LINK CONTEXT

I have seen at http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/H4  
that Example 3 violates Multiple Ways and Link Context (2.4.4 and  
2.4.9), because the sample is does not retain the meaning as Multiple  
Ways and Link Context will.

Please fix this.

=============================================================
3) Consultant Questions
These are questions that should be addressed to consultants.  They do  
not fall into the category of things we need to change in the next  
release of the WCAG support documents.

=================

From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 31, 2009 2:11:12 AM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Link Purpose

I have a question.

I have links to zip and PDF documents.

What is the appropriate title for my links for 2.4.4 and 2.4.9?


  ==========================
  From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 31, 2009 8:01:53 AM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Consistent Navigation (3.2.3)

My links, logo and other information appear in the same consistency. I  
am sure about Test # 2 (For each component, check that it appears in  
the same relative order with regard to other repeated components on  
each Web page where it appears). My question that I have is this.  
Since my document appears as a logo at the top left followed by links,  
(identical to appearance of WCAG 2's logo followed by "Contents",  
"Intro", "Previous: Technique" and "Next: Technique link" which is in  
gray.

The only difference between my site and WCAG2 is that the logo to the  
left of the first link (not above).

Does this mean it passes or fails Consistent Navigation?

I am not sure where my navigational component is for statement # 3

"For each navigational component, check that the links or programmatic  
references are always in the same relative order."


=========================
From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 28, 2009 1:36:35 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Consistent Identification/3.2.4

Is Consistent Identification/3.2.4 associated with any rules other  
than forms?

If so, what?


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 28, 2009 1:44:26 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: On Input without Forms

Is On Input/3.2.2 associated with any rules other than forms? If so,  
what?


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 27, 2009 1:22:10 AM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Abbreviation, 3.1.4, G97

In statement G97, it has an example where the expanded version must  
come before the actual abbrevition. I have a situation on my page  
where it is reversed (abbreviation, followed by expansion).

Do I still comply with 3.1.4?


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 24, 2009 10:14:14 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Cc: 508 <508@Access-Board.gov>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Alt tags, Title Tags,  and 4.1.2

I have a document with an image and an alt tag. See example 2c

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/H91

Is the title field mandatory as suggested in 2d, 2e, or do I pass with  
example 2c?


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 17, 2009 12:51:14 AM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Images of Text

I have a question. What is "Images of Text" and how can I find out if  
my page has "Image of Text"? Can someone please give me a few sample  
sites to look at and explain what domian1.com, domain2.com, "contain"  
images of text vs domain3.com and explain why domain3.com does not  
contain images of text?

FYI: I created domain1.com, domain2.com, and domain3.com to protect  
everybody's privacy.

Just change the URL's to a real sitename.

Sincerely,

Chris

===============================

On Jul 10, 2009, at 10:46 PM, Chris Reeve wrote:
I have a page that has a link. The link goes to a different page. The  
second page is an image with an alt tag.  The first page is the title  
of the link.

Does this pass 2.4.4?

If not, what can I do to pass 2.4.4?

I also asked a question about Meaningful Sequence for letter-spacing.  
This has not been answered yet.


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 17, 2009 12:51:14 AM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Images of Text

I have a question. What is "Images of Text" and how can I find out if  
my page has "Image of Text"? Can someone please give me a few sample  
sites to look at and explain what domian1.com, domain2.com, "contain"  
images of text vs domain3.com and explain why domain3.com does not  
contain images of text?

FYI: I created domain1.com, domain2.com, and domain3.com to protect  
everybody's privacy.

Just change the URL's to a real sitename.

Sincerely,

Chris


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 19, 2009 1:58:40 AM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Server Side Scriptiing: Htaccess

Please take a look at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/SVR2.html, http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/SVR3.html 
, and at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/SVR4.html. There are times  
when several sites want to block people by domain name, by IP  
addresss. or block by referral for security reasons.

Can I mantain my .htaccess (deny from all, allow) security and still  
meet WCAG 2 standards?

My boss wants me to use a deny script  based on http://www.javascriptkit.com/howto/htaccess5.shtml
http://www.javascriptkit.com/howto/htaccess14.shtml

This is used against individuals who we think are causing problems  
with our site.


On Jul 10, 2009, at 10:46 PM, Chris Reeve wrote:


I have a page that has a link. The link goes to a different page. The  
second page is an image with an alt tag.  The first page is the title  
of the link.

Does this pass 2.4.4?

If not, what can I do to pass 2.4.4?

I also asked a question about Meaningful Sequence for letter-spacing.  
This has not been answered yet.


On Jul 10, 2009, at 10:46 PM, Chris Reeve wrote:


I have a page that has a link. The link goes to a different page. The  
second page is an image with an alt tag.  The first page is the title  
of the link.

Does this pass 2.4.4?

If not, what can I do to pass 2.4.4?

I also asked a question about Meaningful Sequence for letter-spacing.  
This has not been answered yet.




From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 10, 2009 11:29:27 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Correction for request on 2.4.4

I "recently" submitted a request to troubleshoot link request 2.4.4  
Link Purpose. I "also" want to comply with 2.4.5 (Multiple Ways). At  
the moment, I am trying to focus on G125 for Multiple Ways.

"If" my scenario from my first e-mail fails accessibility, what can be  
done to 2.4.4 and G125 for Multiple Ways?

Reminder: 2.4.4 Question: The page is has a link where an image is  
located. The title of the desination link is different because it  
contains text as well.



From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 10, 2009 10:46:52 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Link Purpose, 2.4.4, and Meaningful Sequence

I have a page that has a link. The link goes to a different page. The  
second page is an image with an alt tag.  The first page is the title  
of the link.

Does this pass 2.4.4?

If not, what can I do to pass 2.4.4?

I also asked a question about Meaningful Sequence for letter-spacing.  
This has not been answered yet.


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 9, 2009 7:44:23 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Meaningful Sequence/Letter spacing

Is there a requirement that the letter spacing must be spaced at a  
minium length?

There is a statement at Visual Presenation that line spacing is at  
least space-and-half within paragraphs, and paragraph spacing is at  
least 1.5 times larger than the line spacing.

Is there a similar minimum length requirement for Meaningful Sequence.  
I am not trying to adopt Visual Presenation. It is only used as an  
example..


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 6, 2009 1:52:30 AM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Alternative Text

Is there a corresponding rule that an alt text must be within a  
certain limit of characters.

I used to use the advice, that alt text needs to be short. However,  
that is too vague. It does not describe how show or long the text can  
be..

WAVE has a limit that an alt text must be less than 100 characters.  
However, Cynthia Says has a rule that an alt text must be greater than  
7 charters and less than 81 characters (including spaces).

Does WCAG 2.0 have a rule that clarifies how short or long an alt text  
can or cannot be until the developers need to use the longesc tag?


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 1, 2009 11:16:18 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Meaningful Sequence

If an image at the top of my page changes its orientation when the  
style sheet is removed, based on checkpont G57, but the content does  
have any effect, does it pass or fail Meaningful Sequence?



From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 1, 2009 11:15:31 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Abbreviations/WCAG 3.1.4

My boss recently wanted me to change the site. Before it complied with  
3.1.4.

The old format was <P>Welcome to the <ACRONYM title="World Wide  
Web">WWW</ACRONYM>!. At my supervisor's request, the new format is WWW/ 
World Wide Web.

I prefer not to give away my actual abbreviation or acronym content  
for security purposes. Will my new format pass 3.1.4?

If not, why not?


Resent-From: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: June 29, 2009 11:40:54 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: Meaningful Sequence

If an image at the top of my page changes its orientation when the  
style sheet is removed, based on checkpont G57, but the content does  
have any effect, does it pass or fail Meaningful Sequence?
=================================




From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: July 29, 2009 12:35:00 PM CDT
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Subject: BYPASS BLOCKS 2.4.1

Please take a look at http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/versions/ 
guidelines/. Is the skip link at the top right a sample of "G1",  
"G123", "G124", all of the above, or none of the above.

If all or none of the above, please explain?

If it is only a sample of one of the the three, can you give an html  
sample on the other two?
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 14:10:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:12 UTC