Re: Action Item: 1/9 - EDL Usefulness by Authoring Tool Development G roups

Hi Lisa,

another use case is for the authring tool itself to generate EDL, according
to what it knows about the document. There is a requirement that a statement
can be verified to be about a particular version, but the idea was that this
information can be used by the author as a basis for a claim of accessibility
/ conformance to something, or for selecting a tool to use for repair, based
on the identified problems. (Or selecting an evaluation tool based on what
hasn't been checked yet...)

Since most of the work on this has been done in ER, it would be worth asking
them the same question.

cheers

Charles

On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Lisa Mauldin wrote:

  Hello All,

  As a newcomer to the arena of authoring tools and the related issues, I felt
  I needed to get a better handle on the issues discussed in the 1/9
  conference call before approaching our authoring tool product groups.

  I have exchanged a couple of e-mails off-list, as well as conversed by
  phone, with Len, and before I round up the troops (several products within
  MS), I wanted to be sure I was asking the right questions so that the
  feedback would be useful and meaningful to the E&R and AT working groups.

  So, here is my action item, in my own words.  If this is not correct, or if
  it is incomplete, please provide feedback at your convenience.

  Action Item:
  > I need to check with the authoring tool development teams to see if they
  > would have use for a standardized evaluation description language (EDL)
  > that is produced by an external evaluation (and possibly repair?) process
  > .  This EDL would be in machine readable format, and some possible user
  > scenarios:
  > 1) Evaluation Tool produces an error report in EDL, which can then be used
  > as input into an authoring tool.
  > 2) A developer runs several evaluation tools, one that checks for 508
  > standards, one that checks for WCAG, and one that checks for
  > organizational internal standards compliance.  The three reports -
  > produced in EDL - are then combined and processed by the authoring tool.
  > 3) an automated evaluation of a website is conducted by an evaluation
  > tool, and the errors are provided in EDL, which is then provided as input
  > to the authoring tool for prompting for correction by a developer and/or
  > accessibility "expert."
  >
  The authoring tool input could be provided in XML or RDF, or would the
  authoring tool developers have any preferences including (or in addition to)
  these possible suggestions.

  Lisa Mauldin
  Accessibility Program Manager
  Product Accessibility Consulting Team
  Phone: 425-707-4180
  http://www.microsoft.com/enable



-- 
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, Australia
until 6 January 2001 at:
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Monday, 15 January 2001 19:01:50 UTC