W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 1999

Re: Comments and Recommendations

From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 15:57:09 -0400
Message-Id: <4.1.19991005174718.009c8d60@pop3.concentric.net>
Message-Id: <4.1.19991005174718.009c8d60@pop3.concentric.net>
Message-Id: <4.1.19991005174718.009c8d60@pop3.concentric.net>
To: pjenkins@us.ibm.com
Cc: Authoring Tools Guidelines List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>, janina@afb.net
aloha, phil!

i can live with the idea that 7.1 covers the sun and the moon, provided that a
specific reference to help and documentation is inserted into the Techniques
document  -- especially a specific mention of how online (i.e. on-the-web and
not runtime help) MUST be WCAG compliant, so that it can be accessed by all,
including those not fortunate enough to be using a UAGL-compliant user agent or
for those users for whom a UAGL-compliant user agent that provides the specific
combination of functionalities they need does not (yet) exist ...

specifically, i'd like to insert verbiage into the introductory text (in both
the Guidelines and the Techniques document) for Guideline 7 about the necessity
of ensuring that all help and documentation is provided in an accessible
format, as well as ensuring that, when help and documentation is provided in a
W3C Recommendation-based format, it include all applicable accessibility
enhancements and features built into that particular W3C Rec, as well as being
WCAG compliant...

i'd also like the issue of help and documentation addressed in the bulleted
lists of "Common Requirements" that appear in the Techniques for Checkpoint 7.1
-- not only under the heading "Following Standards", but also under the
headings "Icons, Graphics, and Sounds", "Layout", and "User Focus"

the nice thing is, janina has provided us with some very nice fodder that can
be fleshed out not only into an addendum to the introduction to Guideline 7 and
the Techniques for 7.1, but also into a narrative technique on the topic for
the AU Techniques document!

thanks, janina!

Phil wrote:
>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

He that lives on Hope, dies farting
     -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1763
Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
   WebMaster and Minister of Propaganda, VICUG NYC
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 1999 15:51:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:28:22 UTC