- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:33:31 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Neil Soiffer <Neils@dessci.com>
- CC: PFWG Public Comments <public-pfwg-comments@w3.org>
Dear Neil Soiffer: Thank you for your comments on the 24 February 2009 Last Call Working Draft of Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-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=1; * 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 Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 editors' draft at http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/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 Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0. Regards, Janina Sajka, PFWG Chair Michael Cooper, PFWG Staff Contact Comment 4: Comment on WAI-ARIA Role (math) Date: 2009-03-03 Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009JanMar/0022.html Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - math (role) <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/#math> Status: Accepted proposal ------------- Your comment: ------------- I'm glad that the math role is in the last call. Although I'm partly responsible for the present wording, I'd like to suggest a change to clarify it. Some documents use HTML elements such as <sup> and <sub> to represent math. Eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_polynomial has both images with alt text (in TeX) and "HTML math" (around the 6th line). <i>a</i><i>x</i><sup>2</sup> + <i>b</i><i>x</i> + <i>c</i> = 0 Another example later down is: <i>f</i>(<i>x</i>) = <i>x</i><sup>2</sup> + <i>x</i> - 2 Although I tend to think of these a "ASCII art", some people might not think of them as "ASCII". So, I suggest the spec be changed from using the term "ASCII art" in: "However, since there exists significant amounts of legacy content that use images and ASCII art to represent mathematical expressions..." to something like: "However, since there exists significant amounts of legacy content that use images and textual approximations using ASCII art or HTML tags (eg, SUB and SUP) to represent mathematical expressions..." There is a further clarification that is needed. The section goes on to say "The text equivalent used in such situations *SHOULD* be valid MathML or TeX....images *SHOULD* also be labeled by text that describes the math formula as it should be spoken, using the aria-describedby<http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/#aria-describedby> attribute <http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/#def_attribute>." The sentence should start, "For images, ...". and should be followed by a sentence for what to do for "textual approximations". They should be wrapped in a div or span so that there is something to hang the role and described by attributes. There isn't (I think) a place to put TeX or MathML, but if only simple elements like <i>, <sup>, and <sub> are used, those are easy enough to figure out. Others usages would be hard to figure out (and hard to author without a tool), as would ASCII art. If there were a way to give TeX or MathML, that would be best, but I don't know how it could be done. It would be good to add examples using images and html tags to the best practices section and to link to them in the explanation. The wikipedia page included above can serve as a source for some examples. -------------------------------- Response from the Working Group: -------------------------------- Thank you for your comment. We have accepted your first two text changes, and added the examples we discussed with you at the TPAC meeting in November.
Received on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 00:33:40 UTC