Re: "make the tool accessible"

>I think it will be helpful to alert the reader's mind before we
>come to the guidelines where there is less distinction.

I agree that it is helpful to alert the reader, in fact, we do a good job
already with the "Abstract", "Introduction", "Checkpoint", and definitions
[including the goals we talked about at WWW8] on priorities.  In the 6 May draft
we state:

Abstract
This document provides guidelines for Web authoring tool developers. Its purpose
is two-fold: to assist developers in designing authoring tools that generate
accessible Web content and to assist developers in creating an accessible
authoring interface.

Introduction
... These guidelines emphasize the role of the user interface in informing,
supporting, correcting, and motivating authors during the editing process.

Checkpoint
.... A checkpoint answers the question "What must/should/may I do to make an
authoring tool (and the content it produces) accessible?"

Since we already do a good job of alerting the reader I do not believe that that
is reason alone to move the guideline/checkpoint to the front of the one list.
In fact, as many of you know from WWW8 meetings, I'm concerned with the
inclusion at all of a checkpoint on making the tool accessible because "software
accessibility" is covered in many other places.  I also believe a developer
[since I are one] will be more concerned first with the functions and features
he or she needs to add.   Making those features accessible is just as important
as the other things he or she needs to be concerned with;  "abilities" of the
features and functions like translation, documentation, usability,
compatibility, accessibility, etc.  I encourage the working group to keep the
checkpoint on "make the tool accessible" at the end of the list.

Regards,
Phill Jenkins

Received on Wednesday, 19 May 1999 13:14:16 UTC