- From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:11:57 +1000 (EST)
- To: spec-prod@w3.org
- cc: wendy@w3.org
Background: The Web Content Guidelines working group (http://www.w3.org/WAI/gl/) is in the early stages of preparing a working draft of one of its central deliverables, namely a document that may eventually be proposed as the next version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. We would like to take advantage of the XMLSpec DTD in order to facilitate the editing and publication of this material. Naturally, it would be advantageous to adopt XMLSpec as early as possible in the drafting process. Consequently, the following issues arise: 1. Currently, what is the best XSL style sheet or other processing application available to be used in generating (X)HTML from XMLSpec source documents? What would be the most effective means of producing Postscript or PDF output (preferably with a style sheet)? 2. The normative component of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines consists in numbered checkpoints which are grouped under more general requirements. In the HTML markup of WCAG 1.0, these are represented as definition lists, with the defined term being the text of the checkpoint, and the "definition" being the accompanying explanatory text. What markup should be used in XMLSpec to characterize such checkpoints and their accompanying explanations? Should the outer "guidelines" be represented, as in the HTML markup of WCAG 1.0, as headings, or would a nested list structure be preferable, with checkpoints included as lists within an outermost list of guidelines? The GLIST element could potentially be used to represent checkpoints, but this would be stretching the semantics somewhat. GLIST with ROLE="checkpoint" could be another possibility; or alternatively the DTD developers may wish to add markup to encompass this kind of strucutre. What makes the situation more confusing is that the terminology may not be stable (that is to say, what are called "checkpoints" in the current guidelines may be referred to as "guidelines", "strategies" etc., in the next version; and so a generic term would need to be used in any markup). Basically the structure is akin to a definition list, with a numbered statement (a proposition) being associated with explanatory material that may include paragraphs, notes, examples etc. 3. The technical report describing the XMLSpec DTD does not itself conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. In particular, there are syntax diagrams in the report which depict the content models used in the DTD; and these are not accompanied by textual equivalents. Can this be corrected? The best solution would be to provide, as a textual alternative to each image, the full content model, in XML syntax, with the parameter entities expanded, as in the DTD fragments provided in the body of the HTML 4.01 specification. Any information or suggestions would be much appreciated.
Received on Tuesday, 1 August 2000 20:13:40 UTC