RE: Suggestion for issues color and variations in presentation of text related issues.

Hmmmm

Making it an OR doesn't move it to Level 1 ---  it eliminates one.

Instead of having to do one at level 1 and one at level 2 you now only have
to do one for level 1 and 2 (and 3) 

Also wasn't the purpose of this was to help color blind people too and they
would not be helped with programmatically determined.   ??


Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-wcag-teamc-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wcag-teamc-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Becky Gibson
> Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 4:22 PM
> To: public-wcag-teamc@w3.org
> Subject: Suggestion for issues color and variations in presentation of
> text related issues.
> 
> 
> Issue 665 suggests modifying 1.3.2 to also allow the information to be
> programmatically determined. I actually think this is reasonable, covers
> what we want, and allows for future expansion.   Although, we would have
> to be careful to word it clearly and make the HTM document very explicit.
> 
> I am making a fairly controversial proposal to combine 1.3.2 and 1.3.4 at
> level 1.
> 
> <proposal for  1.3.2>
> Information that is conveyed by variations in presentation of text is also
> conveyed in text, or the information can be programmatically determined.
> </proposal>
> 
> we would have to update the variations in presentation of text definition
> to include color.
> 
> Sufficient techniques would be:
> Situation A: If the variations in presentation of text  of particular
> words is used to indicate information.
> G14: Ensuring that color encoded information is also available in text
> G122: Including a text cue whenever color cues are used
> G117: Using text to convey information that is conveyed by variations in
> presentation of text
> Marking emphasized or special text USING technology-specific techniques to
> convey the same information as the emphasize or special text (for a
> technology in your baseline)
> 
> Situation B: If color is used within an image to convey information.
> 1.      G111: Using color and pattern (for example, colors on bar/pie
> charts with lines or texture fills)
> 2.      G14: Ensuring that color encoded information is also available in
> text
> 
> HTML Techniques for Marking Text
> H49: Using semantic markup to mark emphasized or special text
> 
> 
> We would need to add an additional failure, Failure due to conveying
> information via text color alone. The failure would be a form that has the
> instructions, "Required fields are labeled with red text". With the
> explanation that even though a user agent or assistive technology can
> programmatically determine that text label for a field is in a particular
> color, this SC requires that the user be able to obtain the information
> about the field - that it is required.
> 
> 
> I think we can add "programmatically determined" to this SC as long as we
> emphasize that the INFORMATION is programmatically determined NOT the
> variation in presentation of text.   It does elevate 1.3.4 which did allow
> just the variation to be programmatically determined.  I'm not sure why we
> would want to allow that anyway - I know we discussed it but how is making
> something bold any better than marking it in color?  It just helps color
> blind folks but doesn't help the blind.  The sufficient techniques all
> require that the information is available or use techniques from 1.3.1
> which is already at level 1.
> 
> Feel free to shoot this proposal down if you remember more about the
> discussions than I do.  I was just trying to make a proposal that would
> make us think and perhaps move beyond the road blocks we keep encountering
> for 1.3.2 and 1.3.4.  I think this proposed rewording does accomplish what
> we want.  Currently 1.3.4 is at level 2 but the sufficient techniques
> already require that the information can be determined not just the
> variations in presentation of text.
> This proposal would negate the resolution to issue 559 but would address
> 558 and 665.
> 
> 
> food for thought,
> 
> 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 Sunday, 24 September 2006 04:11:46 UTC