Re: Organization of techniques document

> 1. Criteria for Implementation
>...  they are all actual "sub-checkpoints."

I agree with Ian that we do NOT want sub-checkpoints. I believe we can stay
with Guidelines, Checkpoints, and Techniques.

> 2. Suggested Implementations
> ... For example how would you implement this checkpoint in a
> conversion tool, a courseware tool, an HTML editor or a WYSIWYG tool.

I like these categories as a first draft.  I believe that these categories
will go a long way in helping developers in finding and/or developing
techniques that meet the checkpoint.  Some tools may span categories, which
is O.K. for me.  may span

web review . com [1] uses some additional categories that might be more
industry standard, or at least we should look at, such as database, java,
graphics editor, site management, split multimedia into sound/audio only
and video with sound, search, and security.  Some categories, such as
database, search, and security may have limited user interface, they may
not be applicable to all checkpoints. So not all checkpoints need all
categories.

[1] http://webreview.com/wr/pub/webtools

>3. Sample Implementations

Real implementations should be kept in a separate document to keep the
techniques manageable

> 4. Relevant Documents
>Here we would link in ...the ERT document ... 4.1 and 4.2.

I don't think we need another section heading called "relevant documents" .
Whether it is in-line or on a separate relevant document will complicate
the organization and presentation.

> I also propose that we allow different views of the document.
> So a graphic editor developer could get the graphic editor view

Great idea! The categories in number 2 will facilitate this.

Testing section.  [idea that I heard on the call]
The IBM guidelines are organized into rationale, techniques, and testing.
Testing covers how the developers would validate that the technique was
implemented correctly - NOT whether the checkpoint is met - subtle
difference since more than one technique may be needed to meet the ATAG
checkpoint.

The consensus of this discussion should become the section in the
techniques document titled:
"Structure of this document"
As an example, see the new ERT document at
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/#q7
which is a better example on what we are trying to do than that in the WCAG
section on how the guidelines are organized
http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-19990505/#organization
In other words, we should cover the techniques document structure which
includes more that the organization of each technique.


[1] http://webreview.com/wr/pub/webtools

Regards,
Phill Jenkins,  678-4517
IBM Accessibility Center - Special Needs Systems
11501 Burnet Rd,  Austin TX  78758    http://www.ibm.com/able

Received on Wednesday, 8 March 2000 16:49:18 UTC