- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:31:08 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- CC: PFWG Public Comments <public-pfwg-comments@w3.org>
Dear Shawn Henry: Thank you for your comments on the 24 February 2009 Working Draft of WAI-ARIA 1.0 Authoring Practices (http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-practices-20090224/). The Protocols and Formats Working Group has reviewed all comments received on the draft. We would like to know whether we have understood your comments correctly and whether you are satisfied with our resolutions. Please review our resolutions for the following comments, and reply to us by 1 February 2010 to say whether you accept them or to discuss additional concerns you have with our response. You can respond in the following ways: * If you have a W3C account, we request that you respond online at http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/comments/acknowledge?document_version_id=2; * Else, by email to public-pfwg-comments@w3.org (be sure to reference our comment ID so we can track your response). Note that this list is publicly archived. Please see below for the text of comments that you submitted and our resolutions to your comments. Each comment includes a link to the archived copy of your original comment on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/, and may also include links to the relevant changes in the WAI-ARIA 1.0 Authoring Practices editors' draft at http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/20091214/. Due to the scope of changes made in response to comments on the Last Call Working Draft of WAI-ARIA, we are returning the specification to Working Draft status. We will shortly publish a public "stabilization draft" of WAI-ARIA and updated Working Drafts of the accompanying documents. While these versions will not incorporate further discussion based on your acknowledgement of our response to your comments, we will work with you on your feedback as part of our preparation for the following version. You are also welcome to submit new comments on the new public versions in addition to sending your acknowledgement of our response to your previous comments. Note that if you still strongly disagree with our resolution on an issue, you have the opportunity to file a formal objection (according to 3.3.2 of the W3C Process, at http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#WGArchiveMinorityViews) to public-pfwg-comments@w3.org. Formal objections will be reviewed during the candidate recommendation transition meeting with the W3C Director, unless we can come to agreement with you on a resolution in advance of the meeting. Thank you for your time reviewing and sending comments. Though we cannot always do exactly what each commenter requests, all of the comments are valuable to the development of WAI-ARIA 1.0 Authoring Practices. Regards, Janina Sajka, PFWG Chair Michael Cooper, PFWG Staff Contact Comment 84: Wording of editing RIA Date: 2009-04-15 Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0061.html Relates to: WAI-ARIA 1.0 Authoring Practices - 10. Reusable Component Libraries <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-practices-20090224/#reuse_comp_lib> Status: Accepted proposal ------------- Your comment: ------------- Comment: "Writing rich internet applications is much more difficult than writing in HTML. It is even more work to ensure your application runs in multiple browsers and supports WAI-ARIA." That is pretty strong. Please reconsider wording. This could be taken out of context and used to say that the main point is that ARIA is really hard, instead of how awesome it is to the user. Editors Response: I'll happily take wording suggestions. I did nothing yet. EOWG Response: Please reconsider the whole point of this section. Do you even need to say that it's hard? Also note that a library is not recommended in all cases; e.g., if you've just got one little slider you probably don't want to go through the whole deal to set up a library. Maybe just say something along the lines of: "For complex applications, it is usually best to use existing widget libraries that implement WAI-ARIA and have already gone through:... [extensive assistive technology testing, cross browser testing, testing to ensure that the widgets respond to desktop settings, testing to ensure that the widgets match a common keyboard style guide]" -------------------------------- Response from the Working Group: -------------------------------- We shall change the text of this section a similar section in the WAI-ARIA Best Practices Guide to: Rich internet applications are often more complex to write and to save time it is faster to use existing widget libraries that implement WAI-ARIA and have already gone through: * extensive assistive technology testing * cross browser testing * testing to ensure that the widgets respond to desktop settings * testing to ensure that the widgets match a common keyboard style guide Some publicly available UI component libraries have already implemented WAI-ARIA. Authors can reuse such libraries to start developing accessible rich internet applications. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment 85: Separate vendor-specific information Date: 2009-04-15 Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0061.html Relates to: WAI-ARIA 1.0 Authoring Practices - 3.2.4. Managing Focus with Scroll <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-practices-20090224/#scrollintoview> Status: Accepted proposal ------------- Your comment: ------------- Comment: Note that some EOWG participants were somewhat uncomfortable telling people so strongly to use specific toolkits. (more on this is in a separate email) Editor Response: We have agreed that we will make this change, but I can't promise when it will show up in a draft. EOWG Response: Here is more specific suggestion, from the separate email. [This is in response to: "It is recommended that authors start by using a UI component library which has already implemented WAI-ARIA like the Dojo Toolkit Dijit library."] While EOWG thinks it is useful to tell which toolkits implement WAI-ARIA, we are uncomfortable having the reference in a Note (or Recommendation) because of the time and effort required to update it. e.g., if another toolkit comes out with awesome WAI-ARIA support the day after this is published, it would not be listed for months or years until the Note is updated. Please consider linking to a separate page where such information can be updated more easily -- perhaps in the FAQ [4]<http://www.w3.org/WAI/aria/faq>. Also, please check if there are other references throughout the other documents that would be more appropriately handled on a separate page. [4] http://www.w3.org/WAI/aria/faq -------------------------------- Response from the Working Group: -------------------------------- We agree we do not wish to reference specific products. We are creating an implementation tracking page and will reference that where specific implementations are listed currently.
Received on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 00:31:17 UTC