Re: importing and converting markup

I definitely support combing the two checkpoints, and offer a proposed
rewording to clarify a couple issues.

How about:
Preserve accessible content during conversions or transformations. 

The issue that I am trying to clarify is that a tool might make
transformations either while importing or exporting. I interpretted
Charles' proposal to only address exports.  I'm not sure that my proposal
makes it any more clear.  

I deleted the explicit mention of types of conversions/transformations to
leave it open to all types.  I don't feel strongly about leaving them out.  

--wendy


At 07:19 PM 5/28/99 , Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>we currently have
>
>2.3.4:  [Priority 1] The tool must recognize accessibility markup for any
>language or format that it imports or converts. 
>
>2.3.5:  [Priority 1] Never remove markup supported by the tool that is known
>to promote accessibility
>
>I think these are both dealing with the same thing - preserving accessibility
>features during format, language, or structural transformations (For example
>turning a table into a set of lists, or vice versa.
>
>
>I propose that these two checkpoints be merged into a single one which says
>
>"Preserve all accessibility features in content which is converted or
>transformed into a different language, format, or structure". Priority 1
>
>I think this checkpoint actually belongs under guideline 2.4
>
>The fact that a tool needs to recognise these features in a markup language
>or format the it can import seems to be sufficiently obvious from this
>checkpoint - otherwise we should retain 2.3.4.
>
>charles McCN
>

Received on Wednesday, 2 June 1999 12:09:54 UTC