- From: Jutta Treviranus <jutta.treviranus@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 14:12:10 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
While acknowledging that the primary task is to get some content for the document, we have been giving some thought to the structure of the Techniques document. Here are some thoughts. I propose that each checkpoint in the document have the following sections: 1. Criteria for Implementation The checkpoints in ATAG are still fairly high level, in talking to developers, several of them mentioned that they needed further specifics about how to comply. These criteria would be the verifiable criteria that apply to all tools. They would differ from the suggested implementations in that they are not suggestions, they are all actual "sub-checkpoints." Examples of these would be: The same fonts, text sizes, colors, symbols, etc. that characterize other program features should also characterize those dealing with accessibility. 2. Suggested Implementations These would be examples we imagine of really good implementations. Ideally we should illustrate in this section how the checkpoint would be implemented in various classes of tools. For example how would you implement this checkpoint in a conversion tool, a courseware tool, an HTML editor or a WYSIWYG tool. These are not actual implementations, so there would not be any compromises or gaps in the implementations. If at all possible we should try to include illustrations. 3. Sample Implementations Here we would discuss and illustrate real world implementations of the checkpoint. Within this section we should critique what is done well and discuss what could be done better. 4. Relevant Documents Here we would link in other relevant documents. However, we may link to other documents in the other sections if those documents provide the content for the sections e.g., the ERT document for Suggested Implementations of 4.1 and 4.2. Since this is going to be a fairly hefty document, I also propose that we allow different views of the document. So a graphic editor developer could get the graphic editor view of the document which would leave out the examples and checkpoints that don't apply. Any thoughts or comments? Jutta
Received on Wednesday, 8 March 2000 14:12:36 UTC