- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 18:44:32 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
- cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
hile not actually agreeing, I dont think it is because you are insane *grin*. In implementing the checkpoint there is no particular requirement that you have read the IBM guidelines, just that you have done the things which are standard to the relevant operating system(s), and which are applicable accessibility conventions. In the techniques document we give references to a number of guidelines documents to help developers find those which are applicable to their projects. Imagine a developer working on platform X, where there are a set of guidelines. I would expect those guidelines if they were much good (and many developers have produced comprehensive guidelines) to explain what the accessibility conventions are, or to refer the reader to any other documents which must be read in conjunction. Indeed, in the techniques for this checkpoint requirements which commonly appear in guidelines have been listed. Clearly they are not all applicable to all situations, and they are not claimed to be complete. The reader is referred to documentation which is applicable to various software types, and to various platforms, but the techniques give them a rough idea of what they can expect from a set of guidelines. It is true that checking this checkpoint exhaustively may be difficult. This is not the same as being an undue burden, and I would suggest reading a couple of the checklists and guidelines documents linked from the techniques to check my claim that in fact it is not really very hard to check in most cases. Charles On Wed, 16 Jun 1999, Kynn Bartlett wrote: I think checkpoints should all be "checkable". For 2.1.1, the guideline really is: "The authoring tool is a software program with standard user interface elements and as such should follow relevant user interface accessibility guidelines." _That_ is what must be done. The current checkpoint is: Checkpoints: 2.1.1: [Priority 1] Use all applicable operating system and accessibility standards and conventions. HOWEVER, it's entirely possible to create an accessible web authoring tool if you have NEVER read the IBM guidelines! Following IBM's or Microsoft or Sun's guidelines are a _way_ to ensure that your program has standard user interface elements etc -- therefore this is a _technique_ for the checkpoint of: [Priority 1] Use standard accessibility user interface guidelines as for any other piece of software. Please rewrite this to look better and communicate in terms that can be understood, but what we want them to _do_ is to make the software accessible. I don't CARE if they've never HEARD of IBM's Java rules as long as the tool works and is accessible -- maybe they read a book by Microsoft on accessible java and it never refers to IBM, but still conveys the necessary info? Therefore, I think that we should insist the tool follows normal accessibility conventions but not specify that there's a special set of guidelines (e.g. "operating system") that must be followed. That's HOW most people will satisfy the checkpoint, but the HOW can go in a technique, and the WHAT is something different. Does anyone agree or am I just insane? (BTW sorry about not speaking up more, my throat is still sore and I talked for an hour on the phone to grad student today...) -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/ Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain Internet http://www.idyllmtn.com/ Catch the Web Accessibility Meme! http://aware.hwg.org/ Next Online Course starts August 2 http://www.kynn.com/+nextclass --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA
Received on Wednesday, 16 June 1999 18:44:35 UTC