RE: Comments on SVG Accessibility Mappings -- Language and Scope

Rich Schwerdtfeger

"White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote on 01/26/2015 12:28:19 PM:

> From: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>
> To: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>, Richard
> Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
> Cc: "public-svg-a11y@w3.org" <public-svg-a11y@w3.org>
> Date: 01/26/2015 12:28 PM
> Subject: RE: Comments on SVG Accessibility Mappings -- Language and Scope
>
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds [mailto:amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com]
> >Since the approach of the SVG working group is that SVG won't have
strict
> >versioning, and new SVG features should be backwards-compatible, I don't
> >think the SVG Accessibility doc should have separate rules for SVG 2 vs
SVG
> >1.1.  However, since the SVG 2 text hasn't been finalized, we don't want
to
> >explicitly repeat rules that might become outdated.
>
>
> Not for the first public working draft, but I would hope the SVG
> accessibility API mapping specification (now on a Recommendation
> track) would be on a time-line synchronized with that of the SVG 2
> specification. In that case, we should be able to include all
> necessary features to support SVG 2 fully.
> >
> >Instead, perhaps include a more general statement that, if there are
more
> >than one `<title>` or `<desc>` elements, the accessible name/description
> >computations will use choose one according to the rules defined in the
SVG
> >specifications.  For the working drafts, you could add an Editor's
> Note pointing
> >to both the SVG 1.1 section and the draft SVG 2 section.
>
> That seems reasonable to me, although developers might well prefer
> all the rules to be in the one document for testing and
> implementation purposes.
>
> If the publication schedules are aligned (accessibility API mappings
> and SVG 2), then this shouldn't present a problem.
>
I am hoping the 2 specs. would be in synch. I also hope the SVG working
group makes a decision on animation. I would like to know what is in and
what is out.

At this point I would have to instruct IBM product teams to not use the
built in animation features of SVG because U.S. Federal is all IE.

>
> ________________________________
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged
> or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual
> for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you
> received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not
> disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the
> contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any
> other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
>
> ________________________________