Issue LC-636 - need feedback before I draft a response

Issue LC-636 suggest changing the wording of SC 1.3.4 FROM:
Information that is conveyed by variations in presentation of text is also 
conveyed in text, or the variations in presentation of text can be 
programmatically determined. 

TO:
Information that is conveyed by variations in presentation of text is also 
conveyed in text, or the information can be programmatically determined. 

The rationale for the change is that the information is what the user 
needs not the change in presentation.   While I tend to agree, I think 
this would make the SC much stricter than intended.  If the variations in 
presentation can be programmatically determined, the assistive technology 
can present that variation to the user - thus providing the same 
information (that the text is styled differently) to persons with 
disabilities.   What that variation in presentation means, however, is 
left for the Web author to define and explain to the user. For example new 
vocabulary words are listed in bold,  required fields are bold, etc. 

I, however, think the change is one we should consider. Ths is a level 2 
SC and thus should require some additional work by the Web author.   If we 
accept this change, the current sufficient technique of Using semantic 
markup to mark emphasized or special text [2] would no longer be valid. 
The failure, Failure of SC 1.3.1 and 1.3.4 due to using CSS to create 
variations in presentation of text that conveys information without also 
using the appropriate markup or text [3] would need to be changed as well. 
  We could add a Dynamic Web content Accessibility technique of using the 
role="required" attribute as a sufficient technique for required fields 
(although it might have to be advisory until the Dynamic Web Content 
Accessibility roadmap is more widely supported.   The existing, G117: 
Using text to convey information that is conveyed by variations in 
presentation of text [4] technique would still be sufficient.   Another 
sufficient technique would be a modification of the existing, technique, 
G14: Ensuring that color encoded information is also available in text [5]
.

What does the group think?  Should this SC be made more useful by 
requiring that the information be programmatically determined rather than 
just the variations in text?  I didn't want to spend time drafting an 
answer until I got some feedback - I suspect there are reasons that I am 
not remembering for making just the variations in presentation 
programmatically determinable.

[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/issue-tracking/viewdata_all.php#636
[2] ww.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/Overview.html#H49
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/Overview.html#F2
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/Overview.html#G117
[5] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/Overview.html#G14



Becky Gibson
Web Accessibility Architect
                                                       
IBM Emerging Internet Technologies
5 Technology Park Drive
Westford, MA 01886
Voice: 978 399-6101; t/l 333-6101
Email: gibsonb@us.ibm.com

Received on Thursday, 29 June 2006 19:14:51 UTC