Re: ACTION-23 - WCAG response to request to modify intent for 1.3.1 Info and Relationships

Pierce,  Allen, all,

I think, in addition to your work tomorrow to help fine tune the text we 
propose to WCAG, it might be helpful to have you on the WCAG call.  You 
are WCAG WG members (have to be to be part of this TF), so you are 
automatically welcome to be at the WG meetings.  And that way if there 
are further on-the-fly edits, you can voice any concerns you have and be 
part of that process.  More efficient that cycling back again to this 
TF, and then again back to the WG...


Peter

On 7/9/2012 3:50 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> I'm good with this.  In fact I think it is an improvement - thanks 
> Pierce.
>
> I think that this is straightforward enough that it could be handled 
> just a part of tomorrows meeting since it has gone to the list and 
> everyone has had a chance to read it.
>
> We can put to survey though too if people feel warranted and it won't 
> jeopardize getting it to WCAG this week  (ooooo  which it would if we 
> wait til Friday)  hmmmm
>
> Up to the chairs to call it.
>
> But nice job Andi then Pierce.
>
>
> /Gregg/
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> Director Trace R&D Center
> Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
> and Biomedical Engineering
> University of Wisconsin-Madison
>
> Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International
> and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project
> http://Raisingthefloor.org   --- http://GPII.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 9, 2012, at 11:27 PM, Crowell, Pierce wrote:
>
>> While that helps, it is the placement that is the issue. I can live 
>> with it, but I made one slight edit for reading relief (removed 
>> “ITEMS THAT SHARE A COMMON CHARACTERISTIC ARE ORGANIZED INTO A” and 
>> changed a couple other words).
>> Should we post this to the survey or just discuss at tomorrow’s 
>> meeting (Note: I may not be able to attend)?
>> Pierce
>> Sighted users perceive structure AND RELATIONSHIPS through various 
>> visual cues — headings are often in a larger, bold font separated 
>> from paragraphs by blank lines; list items are preceded by a bullet 
>> and perhaps indented; paragraphs are separated by a blank line; form 
>> fields may be positioned as groups that share text labels; a 
>> different background color may be used to indicate that several items 
>> are related to each other; words that have special status are 
>> indicated by changing the font family and /or bolding, italicizing, 
>> or underlining them; TABLES ORGANIZE ITEMS WITH ROWS AND COLUMNS 
>> WHERE THE RELATIONSHIP OF CELLS SHARING THE SAME ROW OR COLUMN AND 
>> THE RELATIONSHIP OF EACH CELL TO ITS ROW AND/OR COLUMN HEADER ARE 
>> NECESSARY FOR COMPREHENSION; and so on. Having these structures and 
>> relationships programmatically determined or available in text 
>> ensures that information important for comprehension will be 
>> perceivable by all.
>>
>>
>> *From:*Andi Snow-Weaver [mailto:andisnow@us.ibm.com]
>> *Sent:*Monday, July 09, 2012 4:40 PM
>> *To:*Crowell, Pierce
>> *Cc:*'public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>'
>> *Subject:*RE: ACTION-23 - WCAG response to request to modify intent 
>> for 1.3.1 Info and Relationships
>>
>> Pierce,
>>
>> We don't have to accept this. We can try again.
>>
>> How about this?
>>
>> Sighted users perceive structure AND RELATIONSHIPS through various 
>> visual cues — headings are often in a larger, bold font separated 
>> from paragraphs by blank lines; list items are preceded by a bullet 
>> and perhaps indented; paragraphs are separated by a blank line; form 
>> fields may be positioned as groups that share text labels; a 
>> different background color may be used to indicate that several items 
>> are related to each other; words that have special status are 
>> indicated by changing the font family and /or bolding, italicizing, 
>> or underlining them; ITEMS THAT SHARE A COMMON CHARACTERISTIC ARE 
>> ORGANIZED INTO A TABLE WHERE THE RELATIONSHIP OF CELLS SHARING THE 
>> SAME ROW OR COLUMN AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF EACH CELL TO ITS ROW 
>> AND/OR COLUMN HEADER ARE NECESSARY FOR UNDERSTANDING; and so on. 
>> Having this structure and these relationships programmatically 
>> determined or available in text ensures that information important 
>> for comprehension will be perceivable by all.
>>
>> Andi
>>
>> <image001.gif>
>> <image002.gif>
>> 	
>> *Andi Snow-Weaver*
>> Accessibility Standards Program Manager
>> Human Ability & Accessibility Center
>>
>> Tel: +1-720-663-2789
>> Email:andisnow@us.ibm.com <mailto:andisnow@us.ibm.com>
>> <image001.gif>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <image003.gif>"Crowell, Pierce" ---07/09/2012 03:20:54 PM---If they 
>> were repetitive, then they selected the lesser of the two.  The 
>> result is now we lost the on
>>
>> From:"Crowell, Pierce" <Pierce.Crowell@ssa.gov 
>> <mailto:Pierce.Crowell@ssa.gov>>
>> To:"'public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>'" 
>> <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>>
>> Date:07/09/2012 03:20 PM
>> Subject:RE: ACTION-23 - WCAG response to request to modify intent for 
>> 1.3.1  Info and  Relationships
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> If they were repetitive, then they selected the lesser of the two.  
>> The result is now we lost the only mention of the word “table” in all 
>> of the INTENT sections.  At least we still have his cousin “tabular.”
>>
>> I’m easy on closing AI-23 if we are willing to add “row, column, and 
>> header” to the examples in 4.1.2. I really wanted it in 1.3.1, but if 
>> there is no clarity there, and I see no added clarity in this 
>> outcome, then a reference in the examples list is desired.
>>
>> Pierce
>>
>> *From:* Andi Snow-Weaver [mailto:andisnow@us.ibm.com]*
>> Sent:* Monday, July 09, 2012 3:25 PM*
>> To:* public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org <mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>*
>> Subject:* ACTION-23 - WCAG response to request to modify intent for 
>> 1.3.1 Info and Relationships
>>
>> Last week the WCAG working group reviewed our request to modify the 
>> intent for 1.3.1 as follows:
>>
>> Replace the current last paragraph which reads:
>>
>> There may also be cases where it may be a judgment call about what 
>> information should appear in text and what would need to be directly 
>> associated. However, wherever possible it is necessary for the 
>> information to be programmatically determined rather than providing a 
>> text description before encountering the table.
>>
>> With the following paragraphs  ( a new one plus the paragraph above 
>> slightly edited)
>>
>> Structure and relationships are often visually perceivable. For 
>> instance, when information is presented in tabular form the visual 
>> structure and relationship of one cell to another, the structure and 
>> relationship of one cell to all the cells sharing the same row or 
>> column, and the relationship of one cell to the row and/or column 
>> header are necessary for understanding information in a table. Having 
>> this structure and these relationships programmatically determined or 
>> available in text ensures that information important for 
>> comprehension will be perceivable to all.
>>
>> There may also be cases where it may be a judgment call as to whether 
>> the relationships should be programmatically determined or be 
>> presented in text. However, when technologies support programmatic 
>> relationships, it is strongly encouraged that information and 
>> relationships be programmatically determined rather than described in 
>> text.
>>
>> Per the survey results and the group discussion, the working group 
>> feels that the first paragraph is repetitive of what is already in 
>> the second paragraph. Instead of adding our first proposed paragraph, 
>> they agreed to this resolution:
>> RESOLUTION: 2nd paragraph gets replaced with “Sighted users perceive 
>> structure through various visual cues — headings are often in a 
>> larger, bold font separated from paragraphs by blank lines; list 
>> items are preceded by a bullet and perhaps indented; paragraphs are 
>> separated by a blank line; items that share a common characteristic 
>> are organized into tabular rows and columns with their headers; form 
>> fields may be positioned as groups that share text labels; a 
>> different background color may be used to indicate that several items 
>> are related to each other; words that have special status are 
>> indicated by changing the font family and /or bolding, italicizing, 
>> or underlining them and so on. HAVING THIS STRUCTURE AND THESE 
>> RELATIONSHIPS PROGRAMMATICALLY DETERMINED OR AVAILABLE IN TEXT 
>> ENSURES THAT INFORMATION IMPORTANT FOR COMPREHENSION WILL BE 
>> PERCEIVABLE TO ALL.
>> With regard to the second paragraph of our proposal, they agreed to 
>> this resolution:
>> RESOLUTION: replace the seventh paragraph with "There may also be 
>> cases where it may be a judgment call as to whether the relationships 
>> should be programmatically determined or be presented in text. 
>> However, when technologies support programmatic relationships, it is 
>> strongly encouraged that information and relationships be 
>> programmatically determined rather than described in text.
>> If there are no objections, with these WCAG resolutions, we can close 
>> ACTION-23 tomorrow.
>>
>> Andi
>

-- 
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to 
developing practices and products that help protect the environment