Response to your comments on Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0

Dear Jan Richards:



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 55: Roles as element types
Date: 2009-04-13
Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0038.html
Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - 1. Introduction <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/#intro>
Status: Accepted proposal

-------------
Your comment:
-------------
This text seems odd for the Introduction:

"Roles are element types and should not change with time or user

actions. Changing the role on an element from its initial value will

likely be treated by accessibility API events as the removal of the old

element and insertion of a new element with the new role."

--------------------------------
Response from the Working Group:
--------------------------------
We agree that this is too much detail for an introduction. We will make the
following modification:



<change>

Roles are element types and should not change with time or user actions.
Changing the role on an element from its initial value will likely be
treated by accessibility API events as the removal of the old element and
insertion of a new element with the new role.



States and properties are used to declare important attributes of an
element that affect and describe interaction. They enable the user agent or
operating system to properly handle the element even when the attributes
are dynamically changed by client-side scripts. For example, alternative
input and output technology such as screen readers, speech dictation
software, and on-screen keyboards must be able to recognize and effectively
communicate various states (disabled, checked, etc.) to the user.

</change>



<to>

Roles are element types and should not change with time or user actions.
This is information is used by assistive technologies, through its
interaction with the user agent, to select its normal processing of that
element type.



States and properties are used to declare important attributes of an
element that affect and describe interaction. They enable the user agent or
operating system to properly handle the element even when the attributes
are dynamically changed by client-side scripts. For example, alternative
input and output technology such as screen readers, speech dictation
software, and on-screen keyboards must be able to recognize and effectively
communicate various states (disabled, checked, etc.) to the user.

</to>

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Comment 56: supportedstate should be requiredstate
Date: 2009-04-13
Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0038.html
Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - 4.2.2. Required States and Properties <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/#requiredState>
Status: Accepted proposal

-------------
Your comment:
-------------
Is this right? Should it perhaps be "role:requiredState"?

4.2.2. Required States and Properties

role:supportedState 

--------------------------------
Response from the Working Group:
--------------------------------
We agree this should be changed to role:requiredState and it will be
changed.



----------------------------------------------------------------------


Comment 57: Presentation role ambiguous
Date: 2009-04-13
Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0038.html
Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - presentation (role) <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/#presentation>
Status: Proposal not accepted

-------------
Your comment:
-------------
"Presentation" role name might be ambiguous (e.g., a powerpoint
presentation) - maybe "non-informative" would be more clear.

--------------------------------
Response from the Working Group:
--------------------------------
The use of role="presentation" is not meant to be informational or
non-informational. It means the corresponding element is meant to effect
the presentation of the user interface and in most cases the layout.
Consequently, we shall continue to use the role name "presentation."

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Comment 58: incomplete role
Date: 2009-04-13
Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0038.html
Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/>
Status: Proposal not accepted

-------------
Your comment:
-------------
An "incomplete" role might also be useful. 

--------------------------------
Response from the Working Group:
--------------------------------
We do not see the use case for a role of "incomplete." This sounds more
like an aria state or property. The aria-busy property for live regions
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/20091214/states_and_properties#aria-busy
seems to fulfill the use case.







----------------------------------------------------------------------


Comment 59: Supporting toolkits
Date: 2009-04-13
Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0038.html
Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - 8.3.1. Authoring Tools <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/#authoring_tools>
Status: Accepted proposal

-------------
Your comment:
-------------
"8.3.1. Authoring Tools" is a little thin - maybe it might be useful to
mention supporting toolkits with built-in ARIA support? 

--------------------------------
Response from the Working Group:
--------------------------------
We have expanded the section on authoring tools.

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Comment 60: Do "9.1 Implentations" need to be in the spec?
Date: 2009-04-13
Archived at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2009AprJun/0038.html
Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - 9.1. Implementations <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wai-aria-20090224/#a_implementation>
Status: Alternate action taken

-------------
Your comment:
-------------
Do "9.1 Implentations" need to be in the spec?

--------------------------------
Response from the Working Group:
--------------------------------
The group feels that the section, now being renamed, belongs in the
specification. However, we do believe it would better serve the
specification if were not part of the main body. Consequently, it is being
moved to a separate page.

Received on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 00:34:12 UTC