AccessModeSufficient

Hello All,

I am struggling a bit with this metadata declaration, or more specifically
the authoring pattern.  The examples shown at:
http://kb.daisy.org/publishing/docs/metadata/schema.org/accessModeSufficient.html
are a bit confusing to the uninitiated, but I believe I am understanding
this correctly. Can I test that assumption?

As I understand it today, both meta values (AccessMode &
AccessModeSufficient) can be expressed in one of two ways: each Mode value
expressed on its own line as a separate entry, *OR* as a single metadata
declaration with a comma separated list of values. (This is where the Daisy
examples get a bit confusing.)

As I understand it then, this means that for the user-agent, this:
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">textual</meta>
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">visual</meta>

and this:
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">textual, visual</meta>

...are processed identically (that somehow the user-agent consuming the
metadata is 'concatenating' the single value declarations programmatically,
or accepting the author's concatenated declaration).

This also suggests then that this:
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">textual, visual</meta>
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">auditory</meta>

…could be (would be?) processed the same as:
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">textual, visual, auditory</meta>

Is that correct? That if, in my metadata block, I make two
accessModeSufficient declarations, one a comma separated list followed
immediately by another declaration with a single 'third' (or fourth but
different) value, that the user-agent will still process it as a
concatenated list of all values in practice? Additionally (and perhaps
conversely), is the concept of cascading in play here? By that I mean, if
the metadata block states:
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">textual, visual</meta>
      <meta xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml "
property="schema:accessModeSufficient">textual</meta>
* (This is an actual example on the Daisy page: **Example 1 — EPUB 3**)*

... is it suggesting that the second declaration, without the second value
of *visual*, "removes" or otherwise "erases" or overrides the previous
declaration: first declaration = textual and visual, second declaration =
textual; which *may *mean that 'visual' is no longer required (using a
mechanism similar to CSS cascading)? Or is it that *textual* is redundantly
declared a second time? (That is what is unclear in the Daisy KB entry I
referenced.) Thanks in advance for the clarification(s).

JF
-- 
*John Foliot* |
Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility |
W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor |

"I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"