User Interface accessibility & Authoring Tool Guidelines

WAI AU:

There's been discussion in the AUWG on the value -- or not -- of including
user interface accessibility information in the WAI Authoring Tool
Guidelines.  

Here are a few thoughts on the importance of addressing UI issues in the AU
Guidelines, followed by a few thoughts on the mechanics of it (modularizing
it? pointing to the UA Guidelines? etc.):

Is guidance on UI accessibility important in the WAI Authoring Tool
Guidelines?

- The AU Working Group was chartered to address accessibility of authoring
tools, including accessibility of the interface as well as author support
for creating accessible documents (read the charter linked from the home
page of your working group); 

- My understanding & expectation for the document that AUWG is developing
is something that will answer the question: "is 'X' authoring tool
accessible, and does it support accessible authoring?";

- WAI has been telling the public for the past year, based on your charter,
that the AU Guidelines document will be addressing UI of authoring tools,
as well as accessibility support; 

- WAI has been hearing very strongly from the public that both these things
are needed: guidance to manufacturers on UI access, and support for
accessibility-friendly authoring;

- Organizations that have mandates to procure accessible technologies would
find that a document that provides guidance only on support for
accessibility-friendly authoring still would not have addressed a basic
question they need to know. 

What are the best mechanics for incorporating guidance on UI accessibility
in the WAI AU Guidlines?
Many possible approaches. A few leading considerations:

- If you try to just point to a UI module in the WAI User Agent Guidelines,
you will likely run into a problem a lack of adequate synchronization,
since the UA WG is close to proposed recommendation and the AU WG has been
proceding slowly, meaning that discussion on AU issues still has not fully
matured, which would put the AU WG in a difficult position to properly
review the UA Guideline's module on user interface accessibility, to ensure
a coordinated approach;

- In addition, there is likely to be some specialization required in
considering user interface accessibility issues relative to authoring tool
guidelines, for instance accessibility requirements involved in the
author's handling of a tree view while authoring a document; or how
screen-reader hot-keys might conflict with authoring commands (this issue
exists in Amaya -- Irčne, is that something you are looking at?) meaning
that you would need at least some treatment of UI specifics in the
authoring tool guidelines;

- Saying that the UI should be accessible but not making it a priority to
be addressed within the overall priority set of the authoring tool
guidelines, in my view demotes the importance of the issue. Yes, the
primary goal of AUWG is to develop guidance that will facilitate the
creation of accessible content on the Web. But let's at the same time make
sure the tools won't shut out disabled users who might want to, whether as
a vocation or avocation, be authoring some of that content on the Web. If
an authoring tool, with full "support" for authoring accessible content,
but lacking an accessible user interface, is still not an accessible tool
then let's make sure the AU Guidelines reflect that;

- Some caveats in the opposite direction: accessibility guidance for the
user interface in the authoring tool Guidelines should not be overly
redundant with what is in the User Agent Guidelines; nor should it in any
way contradict what is in the User Agent Guidelines; nor should it
unnecessarily belabor what's covered in general software accessibility
guidelines elsewhere. 

- In looking at the current Section 6
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/WD-WAI-AUTOOLS-19981110/#guidelines-environment>
I think that this approach is part of what's needed. One thing it lacks is
a calling-out or prioritizing of the user interface issues referenced in
the User Agent Guidelines--I think this is a mistake, and invites the
manufacturer to ignore the referenced issues. To extend the risk further,
the User Agent Guidelines's section on UI itself has a number of external
pointers -- meaning that a manufacturer would need to go through three
levels of indirection to get to essential guidance. Let's make it easy for
manufacturers, by having more of the information in the AU Guidelines
themselves.

- Should the UI issues be addressed by a joint UI module? I don't think so.
I think that enough of the issues are specific enough to either user agents
or authoring tools, and that both the specific issues and the pointers to
more generalized software accessibility information should be right in the
authoring tool guidelines (and right in the user agent guidelines).

Regards,

Judy
Judy


                            




----------
Judy Brewer    jbrewer@w3.org    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) International Program Office
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
MIT/LCS Room NE43-355, 545 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA

Received on Thursday, 12 November 1998 12:41:49 UTC