Re: Definition of Prompt

Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> 
> I would prefer us to use the more common definition of prompt, that it
> requires author response, with the proviso that a prompt can have multiple
> parts, for example the different pieces of stuff required for an image, or
> can cover a multitude of things, for example "there are accesibility errors
> in this document - save anyway?"

I agree with Charles. I think that a prompt requires author response.

 - Ian

> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000, Jutta Treviranus wrote:
> 
>   In discussing the issue of what is a prompt and what would constitute
>   compliance with guideline 3.1, it becomes apparent that we have a
>   contradiction in our documents. In both (Guideline and Technique)
>   Glossary of Terms and Definitions sections we have the following
>   definition:
> 
>   "A "prompt" is a request for author input, either information or a
>   decision. A prompt requires author response. For example, a text
>   equivalent entry field prominently displayed in an image insertion
>   dialog would constitute a prompt. Prompts can be used to encourage
>   authors to provide information needed to make content accessible
>   (such as alternative text equivalents). "
> 
>   Which seems contradictory in and of itself.
> 
>   This is complicated by the technique text following guideline 4 where
>   we speak of prompts in the following terms:
> 
>   "Prompts can be used to encourage authors to provide information
>   needed to make the content accessible (such as alternative text
>   equivalents). Prompts are simple requests for information. For
>   example, a text equivalent entry field prominently displayed in an
>   image insertion dialog would constitute a prompt. Prompts are
>   relatively unintrusive and address a problem before it arises.
>   However, once the author has ignored the prompt, its
>   message is unavailable."
> 
>   We seem to be suggesting that on the one hand prompts require an
>   author response and on the other hand that they are relatively
>   unintrusive and are instruments of encouragement.
> 
>   I think the spirit of what we want is that prompts should provide
>   noticeable encouragement without demanding immediate author response.
>   Therefore I suggest we delete the sentence "A prompt requires author
>   response" from both Definition sections. I also suggest that we
>   delete the sentence "However, once the author has ignored the prompt,
>   its
>   message is unavailable" from the technique section, given that that
>   is not always the case with our broader definition of prompt. In the
>   technique document we also need to make it clear that we are not
>   adhering to the restrictive definition of prompt used in several
>   software development toolkits but a broader definition of prompting.
> 
>   Jutta
> 
> 
> --
> Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
> W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
> Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
> Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia

-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Received on Monday, 24 April 2000 13:39:48 UTC