- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 21:08:05 -0400 (EDT)
- To: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
I propose using the following text (carefully copied from Ian *grin*) as the introduction to the guidelines, to replace the current introduction and scope section: The guidelines in this document are designed to help authoring tool developers understand, and thereby reduce, accessibility barriers to the creation of Web content. In these guidelines, the term authoring tool refers to the wide range of software used for creating Web content, including: + Editing tools specifically designed to produce Web content (e.g., WYSIWYG HTML editors, SMIL authoring packages); + Tools that offer the option of saving material in a Web format (e.g., word processors or desktop publishing packages); + Tools that translate documents into Web formats (e.g., filters to translate desktop publishing formats to HTML); + Tools that produce multimedia, especially where it is intended for use on the Web (e.g., video production and editing suites); + Tools for site management or site publication, including on-the-fly conversion and Web site publishing tools; + Tools for management of layout (e.g., CSS formatting tools). An accessible authoring tool is accessible software that produces accessible content for the Web. For detailed information about the production of accessible content this document relies on the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT]. Similarly, this document does not directly address the general design of accessible software. This document does, however, discuss design issues directly related to accessible authoring tools. One such issue is automation. Authoring tools should automate the mechanical aspects of content development for two reasons: 1. In many cases, it is easier for the tool to ensure that generated content meets the requirements of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. 2. Automation allows users to reduce repetitive work and to concentrate instead on accessible authoring practices that require human creativity (such as authoring alternative text). In addition to automation, the guidelines discuss how appropriate documentation, navigation mechanisms, prompts, the adoption of system conventions, and other features will result in authoring tools that allow users to create content regardless of disability. Accompanying this document is an informative reference, Techniques for Authoring Tool Accessibility [AU-TECHNIQUES], which provides suggestions and examples of how each checkpoint might be fulfilled, as well as further reference where appropriate, such as to general software accessibility guidelines, or documents which address particular issues related to a checkpoint. Readers are strongly encouraged to become familiar with the techniques document, and reminded that while there may be many helpful suggestions there the requirements which need to be fulfilled are the checkpoints in this document, and ways other than those suggesteed may be appropriate for some tools. In the techniques document I would leave out the first and last paragraph. For the first paragraph I suggest: This document is intended as an informative adjunct to the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-AUTOOLS]. Although it reproduces the guidelines and checkpoints from that document it is not a normative reference. It contains suggesteed implementation techniques, examples, and references to othger sources of information, as an aid to developers seeking to implement the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines, and it is expected to be updated in response to queries raised by implementors of the Guidelines. The techniques introduced here are not necessarily the only way of fulfilling the checkpoint, nor are they necessarily a definitive set of requirements for fulfilling a checkpoint. And in place of the last paragraph I suggest To understand the accessibility issues relevant to authoring tool design, consider that many users may be creating documents in contexts very different from your own: + They may not be able to see, hear, move, or may not be able to process some types of information easily or at all. + They may have difficulty reading or comprehending text. + They may not have or be able to use a keyboard or mouse. + They may have a text-only display, or a small screen. In addition, accessible design will benefit many people who do not have a physical disability (yet) but who are in a variety of situtations which give them similar needs. For example they may be working in a noisy environment and unable to hear, or need to use their eyes for another task, and be unable to view a screen. They may be using a small mobile device, with a small screen, no keyboard and no mouse. Charles McCN --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 Monday, 9 August 1999 21:08:06 UTC