Re: Great Free Stuff!

The suggestion that authoring tools not save an author's work unless it is
accessible is unworkable for at least two reasons.
1. No major authoring tool software producer (Microsoft, Netscape, Adobe,
etc) would ever place such a user interface nuisance in their software.
2. Users could enter random characters to get around the checks (and the
requirement of perfectly spelled, grammatically correct Alt text is surely
taking things too far).

It is imperative that accessibility aware HTML authoring tools:
1. convince users to co-operate in the accessibility process by appearing
(and being) quick and easy to use.
2. support users to the maximum extent possible by automating tasks that
wear out user patience. (such as repetitive ALT tagging - ex. updating all
the alt text for a navigation icon)

The idea of using aural previewing is good, but remember that the author is
not always aware of the issues in involved in non-sighted navigation, etc.
and may not spot their own errors.

For those interested, I have written a short (and slightly sarcastic)
introduction to making authoring tools accessible at:
http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/rd/hm/3tions.htm


Jan Richards
jan.richards@utoronto.ca
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre
SoftQuad HotMetal 4.0 Accessibility Development Team


-----Original Message-----
From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Date: Friday, January 30, 1998 3:07 PM
Subject: Great Free Stuff!


>There are at least two major approaches to enhancing guideline
>conformance by users of authoring tools:  Nag with such techniques as
>being reluctant to save the document without there being alt-text tags;
>rewarding the user with freebies like spell checker, alternate "preview"
>modes (like text only or Lynx presentations).  As the aural mode becomes
>more prevalent ("surf on your cell phone" <smile>) the author can have
>the benefit of hearing what the site sounds like.  Many web authors have
>sound cards and a free text-to-speech rendering will be "cool" and help
>sell an authoring with that option.  Whenever the "lint" checker shows
>good accessibility which is confirmed by the aural presentation, the
>author can get congratulated as well as be allowed to save the
>handiwork.
>--
>Love.
>            ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
>http://dicomp.pair.com
>

Received on Monday, 16 February 1998 21:47:54 UTC