Re: Comments and Recommendations

regarding "accessible help"

Janina wrote:
>1.)  "Help" must be accessible help if it is to assist the
>authoring user who relies on assistive technology. This is a
>critical point which should not be absent from the enumerated
>requirements as it now is. It should be classified priority one,
>because it is that important to successful use of an application...

7.1 is a priority 1.  7.1 does include "accessible help" because
at least 2 of the "software checklists", Microsoft's [1] and IBM's [2]
include on-line help and documentation as explicit checklist items.

Why don't we also include KEYBOARD ACCESS, which in my opinion is even
more important that accessible help?  If you don't have keyboard access
you may not even be able to use the product.

I feel we do not need to include any of the items from the
applicable standards and conventions to make 7.1 better understood.
As a parallel example, I feel we do not need to include any of
the Web Content Accessibility checkpoints items either.  We *DO* need to
point to the applicable standards and conventions which affect authoring
- which is currently being done.  Summary: do not add more checkpoints for
"accessible help", or "keyboard access", etc.

[1] Microsoft software checklist
[2] IBM Software checklist

Phill Jenkins

Received on Tuesday, 5 October 1999 15:52:05 UTC