- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:27:17 +0100
- To: "Cynthia Shelly" <cyns@exchange.microsoft.com>
- Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Hi Cynthia, On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@exchange.microsoft.com> wrote: > > Hi, > I'm a member of wai-pf and wcag, and met some of you at the web apps face to face in redmond recently. I was reading through the widgets 1.0 requirements spec, and came across this accessibility requirement. Wondering why only should and may here, and not must? > the reason we have "should" and "may" is to accommodate HTML, which is not as accessible as it could be. To have "must" would mean that HTML4.01 could not meet the requirement. > R37. Language Accessibility > > A conforming specification must specify that the language used to declare the user interface of a widget be either HTML<http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/#html> or a language that is accessible at various levels: it should provide keyboard access to interactive graphical elements, and provide means to access the widget's functionality through an non-graphical UI. The declared interface may also be accessible to screen readers, allowing relevant sections of text and functionality to be accessed by non-visual means. > > Also, I noticed references to google and yahoo web gadgets documentation, and wondered if you'd seen the Windows Live Gadgets SDK [1]? We have, however the spec does not address the requirements of "web widgets", such as iGoogle Gadgets or Windows Live Gadgets. Please see the Widgets Landscape document [1] for differences between web widgets and widgets as understood by the Working Group. Kind regards, Marcos [1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-land/ -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Monday, 14 July 2008 10:28:01 UTC