Re: Idea for Guideline 3 or 5

I think this approach is short sighted if this is truely the operational
model of the working group.  I think that there are more and more people
generating HTML that have no concept of HTML markup.   Tools that can guide
the user to add appropriate accessibility information without the user
understanding the markup is going to be critical if Web Content is going to
become more universally accessible.  I remember Damiel telling a story at
the first WAI meeting several years ago about a person giving an HTML
authoring workshop at one of the WWW conferences that did not even know the
fundamentals of HTML makrup language.

I think the guidelines should at least discuss these types of techniques in
the techniques document.  I would hope there would be more direct
references in the checkpoints and guidelines.

Jon



At 12:54 PM 9/21/99 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>This approach is based on a particular model of user interaction where the
>user is expected not to deal with the markup. In fact many of the most
>popular authoring tools are markup editors, and directing the user away from
>the markup is counter to their whole interface, and would therefore
>contravene guideline 5 (integrate accessibililty into the overall look and
>feel).
>
>Guidelines 4 and 6 should cover the necessary requirements in the type of
>interface you are suggesting, and your suggested scenario would be a valuable
>addition to the techniques for the relevant checkpoints. Thank you again...
>
>cheers
>
>Charles McCN
>
>
>
>On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>
>  The techniques talk alot about allow the author to edit the markup.  While
>  this important and useful it would be, I think just as important to
>  emphesize prompting the user for functional information and hiding the
>  underlying markup as much as possible.  Fo exampel when inserting an image
>  the tool could ask author not just for the ALT text and LONGDESC url.  But
>  ask them first the purpose of the image, is it a:
>  1. Decorative logo
>  2. Image of person, place or thing
>  3. Chart or graph
>  4. Button or link
>  ....
>  
>  The dialog would route the author to the appropraite accessibility
>  questions related to the purpose of the image.  The ALT and LONGDESC for
>  IMG or the proper OBJECT markup would be generated based on the answers and
>  questions the people were asked during the dialog.
>  
>  Could this approach be highlighted in the text of checkpoint?
>  
>  Jon
>  
>  Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
>  Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
>  Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
>  Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
>  University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
>  1207 S. Oak Street
>  Champaign, IL 61820
>  
>  Voice: 217-244-5870
>  Fax: 217-333-0248
>  E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
>  WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
>  		http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
>  		http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
>  
>
>--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

Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
1207 S. Oak Street
Champaign, IL 61820

Voice: 217-244-5870
Fax: 217-333-0248
E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
		http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
		http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess

Received on Tuesday, 21 September 1999 13:58:39 UTC