Fwd: ATAG version 2

The following are Jan's thoughts on revisions to ATAG 1.0 as a basis 
for starting ATAG 2.0

>Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:02:58 -0500
>
>
>Ideas 1: The original ATAG checkpoints with my edits (in inaccessible
>colours)
>Ideas 2: Ideas 1 edited. A possible ATAG 2.0 starting point.
>
>Let's discuss a timeline for opening the ATAG 2 debate.
>
>Cheers,
>Jan
>
>--
>Jan Richards
>Software Designer
>jan.richards@utoronto.ca
>Tel: (416) 946-7060
>Fax: (416) 971-2896
>Adaptive Technology Resource Centre
>University of Toronto
>Checkpoints:
>
>ATAG 1.0 = 28; Suggested ATAG 2.0 = 21
>
>2. Guidelines
>
>Guideline 1. Support accessible authoring practices.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>1.1 Ensure that the author can produce 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Accessible>accessible 
>content in the 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Markup-Language>markup 
>language(s) or content type(s) supported by the tool. [Priority 1]
>At minimum, provide a code editing view that will accept 
>manually-coded accessibility content and ensure that this content is 
>preserved as per Checkpoint 1.2.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-support-access-features>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 1.1
>1.2 Ensure that the tool preserves all 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Access-info>accessibility 
>information during authoring, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Transformation>transformations, 
>and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-conversion-tool>conversions. 
>[Priority 1]
>At minimum, preserve all valid markup, regardless of whether or not 
>the tool is able to be render it all.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-leave-access-content>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 1.2
>1.3 Ensure that the tool automatically generates markup conforming 
>to the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10]. 
>[Relative Priority]
>When the author has not specified a particular markup implementation 
>for an action, the tool's implementation should satisfy the 
>guidelines.
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-generate-access-<span
>></span>markup>Techniques for checkpoint 1.3
>1.4 Ensure that all pre-authored content for the tool conforms to 
>the Web Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. [Relative Priority]
>For example, templates must include accessible markup and content. 
>Images and multimedia libraries must include accessible 
>alternatives, such as alt text and long descriptions for images and 
>captions, auditory descriptions and collated text transcriptions for 
>movies. Applets and scripts must be accessible and include 
>functional alternatives.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-use-accessible-templates>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 1.4
>
>Guideline 2. Generate standard markup.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>2.1 Use the latest versions of W3C Recommendations when they are 
>available and appropriate for a task. [Priority 2]
>  W3C specifications have undergone review specifically to ensure 
>that they enhance or, at least, do not compromise accessibility. If 
>the tool produces markup that does not conform to W3C 
>recommendations, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-inform>inform 
>the author.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-prefer-w3c>Techniques for 
>checkpoint 2.1
>2.2 Ensure that the tool automatically generates valid markup. [Priority 1]
>  Conforming to published markup standards is necessary for 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-User-Agent>user 
>agents to be able to render Web content in a manner appropriate to a 
>particular user's needs.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-ensure-published-DTD>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 2.2
>
>Guideline 3. Encourage the creation of accessible content.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>3.1 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-prompt>Prompt 
>the author to provide 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-alt-eq>equivalent 
>alternative information. [Relative Priority]
>  At times appropriate to the author-tool interaction, ask for (and 
>support the creation of) alternate text, captions, auditory 
>descriptions, collated text transcripts for video, etc.
>Note: Some checkpoints in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 
>2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10] 
>may not apply.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-provide-missing-alt>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 3.1
>3.2 Help the author create structured content and separate 
>information from its presentation. [Relative Priority]
>  ???
>Note: Some checkpoints in Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10] 
>may not apply.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-help-provide-str<span
>></span>ucture>Techniques for checkpoint 3.2
>
>3.3 Do not automatically generate 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-alt-eq>equivalent 
>alternatives. Do not reuse previously authored alternatives without 
>author confirmation, except when the function of the object is known 
>with certainty. [Priority 1]
>  The function of an object may be "known with certainty" when the 
>object is placed by the tool for a specific purpose or the user has 
>defined a purpose. For example, if a tool automatically generates a 
>navigation bar for all pages on a site, it is acceptable to 
>propagate the 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-alt-eq>text 
>equivalent(s) for images that link to searching, the table of 
>contents, etc. When a new object is inserted and the function is 
>unknown, the tool should 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-prompt>prompt 
>the author to enter an appropriate equivalent alternative without 
>providing a default entry, such as the file name. A default entry 
>should only be offered if it is human authored and has been 
>previously associated with the object by the author or within a 
>pre-packaged directory for the tool (ex. clip art gallery). Refer 
>also to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#check-include-pro-descs>checkpoint 
>1.4 and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#check-have-alt-registry>checkpoint 
>3.5.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-no-default-alt>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 3.4
>3.4 Provide functionality for managing, editing, and reusing 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-alt-eq>alternative 
>equivalents for multimedia objects. [Priority 3]
>  These alternative equivalents may be packaged with the tool, 
>written by the author, retrieved from the Web, etc.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-have-alt-registry>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 3.5
>
>Guideline 4. Enable the repair of accessibility problems.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>4.1 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-check-for>Check 
>for and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-inform>inform 
>the author of 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessibility-problem>accessibility 
>problems. [Relative Priority]
>  At a minimum, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-prompt>prompt 
>the author to manually check for specific problems. Ideally, the 
>checks should be automated to the greatest extent possible.
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-notify-on-schedule>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 4.1
>4.2 Assist authors in correcting 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessibility-problem>accessibility 
>problems. [Relative Priority]
>  At a minimum, provide context-sensitive help with the accessibility 
>checking required by 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#check-notify-on-schedule>checkpoint 
>4.1. Ideally, the author should be guided by examples, guidelines 
>and automated tools.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-dont-require-kno<span
>></span>wledge>Techniques for checkpoint 4.2
>4.3Provide the author with a summary of the document's accessibility 
>status. [Priority 3]
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-progress-feedback>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 4.4
>
>Guideline 5. Integrate accessibility solutions into the overall 
>"look and feel".
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>5.1 Ensure that all functionality (prompts, checkers, information 
>icons, etc.) related to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessible-au-practice>accessible 
>authoring practices is naturally integrated into the overall look 
>and feel of the tool. [Priority 2]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-integrate-features>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 5.1
>5.2 Ensure that 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessible-au-practice>accessible 
>authoring practices supporting Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 
>2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10] 
>Priority 1 checkpoints are among the most obvious and easily 
>initiated by the author. [Priority 2]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-visible-means>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 5.2
>
>Guideline 6. Promote accessibility in help and documentation.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>6.1 Document all features that promote the production of accessible 
>content. [Priority 1]
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-document-features>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 6.1
>6.2 Ensure that creating accessible content is a naturally 
>integrated part of the documentation. [Priority 2]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-accessibility-everywhere>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 6.2
>
>Guideline 7. Ensure that the authoring tool is accessible to authors 
>with disabilities.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>7.1 Follow applicable operating system and accessibility standards 
>and conventions (Priority 1 for standards and conventions that are 
>essential to accessibility; Priority 2 for those that are important 
>to accessibility; Priority 3 for those that are beneficial to 
>accessibility).
>  The techniques for this checkpoint include references to checklists 
>and guidelines for a number of platforms and to general guidelines 
>for 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-Accessible>accessible 
>applications.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-use-system-conve<span
>></span>ntions>Techniques for checkpoint 7.1
>7.2 Allow the author to change the presentation within 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Editing>editing 
>views without affecting the document markup. [Priority 1]
>  This allows the author to edit the document according to personal 
>requirements, without changing the way the document is rendered when 
>published. At minimum, this means supporting the display preferences 
>set for the operating system and providing alternate textual 
>representations for non-text elements during editing.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-independent-styles>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.2
>
>7.3 Enable accessible navigation via document structure during 
>editing [Priority 1]
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-navigation-access>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.4
>7.4 Enable editing of the document structure and all properties of 
>each element of the document in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-edit-structure>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.5
>
>
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>ATAG 1.0 = 28
>
>Suggested ATAG 2.0 = 21
>
>2. Guidelines
>
>Guideline 1. Support accessible authoring practices.
>
>If the tool automatically generates markup, many authors will be 
>unaware of the accessibility status of the final content unless they 
>expend extra effort to review it and make appropriate corrections by 
>hand. Since many authors are unfamiliar with accessibility, 
>authoring tools are responsible for automatically generating 
>accessible markup, and where appropriate, for guiding the author in 
>producing accessible content.
>
>Many applications feature the ability to convert 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-document>documents 
>from other formats (e.g., Rich Text Format) into a markup format 
>specifically intended for the Web such as HTML. Markup changes may 
>also be made to facilitate efficient editing and manipulation. It is 
>essential that these processes do not introduce 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-inaccessible-markup>inaccessible 
>markup or remove accessibility content, particularly when a tool 
>hides the markup changes from the author's view.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>1.1 Ensure that the author can produce 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Accessible>accessible 
>content in the 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Markup-Language>markup 
>language(s) or content type(s) supported by the tool. [Priority 1]
>At minimum, provide a code editing view that will accept 
>manually-coded accessibility content and ensure that this content is 
>preserved as per Checkpoint 1.2.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-support-access-features>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 1.1
>1.2 Ensure that the tool preserves all 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Access-info>accessibility 
>information during authoring, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Transformation>transformations, 
>and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-conversion-tool>conversions. 
>[Priority 1]
>At minimum, preserve all valid markup, regardless of whether or not 
>the tool is able to be render it all.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-leave-access-content>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 1.2
>1.3 Ensure that when the tool automatically generates markup it 
>conforms to the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10]. 
>[Relative Priority]
>This applies to all situations in which the tool adds markup to a 
>document except those in which the author has specified a particular 
>markup implementation.
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-generate-access-<span
>></span>markup>Techniques for checkpoint 1.3
>1.4 Ensure that templates provided by the tool conform to the Web 
>Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10]. 
>[Relative Priority]
>Ensure that all pre-authored content for the tool conforms to the 
>Web Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. [Relative Priority]
>For example, templates must include accessible markup and content. 
>Images and multimedia must include accessible alternative, such as 
>alt text and long descriptions for images and captions, auditory 
>descriptions and collated text transcriptions for movies. Applets 
>and scripts must be accessible and include functional alternatives.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-use-accessible-templates>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 1.4
>
>Guideline 2. Generate standard markup.
>
>Conformance with standards promotes interoperability and 
>accessibility by making it easier to create specialized 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-User-Agent>user 
>agents that address the needs of users with disabilities. In 
>particular, many assistive technologies used with browsers and 
>multimedia players are only able to provide access to Web 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-document>documents 
>that use valid markup. Therefore, valid markup is an essential 
>aspect of authoring tool accessibility.
>
>Where applicable use W3C Recommendations, which have been reviewed 
>to ensure accessibility and interoperability. If there are no 
>applicable W3C Recommendations, use a published standard that 
>enables accessibility.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>2.1 Use the latest versions of W3C Recommendations when they are 
>available and appropriate for a task. [Priority 2]
>  W3C specifications have undergone review specifically to ensure 
>that they do not compromise accessibility, and where possible, they 
>enhance it. If the tool produces markup that does not conform to W3C 
>recommendations, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-inform>inform 
>the author.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-prefer-w3c>Techniques for 
>checkpoint 2.1
>2.2 Ensure that the tool automatically generates valid markup. [Priority 1]
>  Conforming to published markup standards is necessary for 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-User-Agent>user 
>agents to be able to render Web content in a manner appropriate to a 
>particular user's needs.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-ensure-published-DTD>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 2.2
>2.3 If markup produced by the tool does not conform to W3C 
>specifications, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-inform>inform 
>the author. [Priority 3]
><<< MOVED INTO THE EXPLANTION FOR 2.1>>>
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-declare-extended-DTD>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 2.3
>
>Guideline 3. Support the creation of accessible content.
>
>Well-structured information and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-alt-eq>equivalent 
>alternative information are cornerstones of accessible design, 
>allowing information to be presented in a way most appropriate for 
>the needs of the user without constraining the creativity of the 
>author. Yet producing equivalent information, such as text 
>alternatives for images and auditory descriptions of video, can be 
>one of the most challenging aspects of Web design, and authoring 
>tool developers should attempt to facilitate and automate the 
>mechanics of this process. For example, prompting authors to include 
>equivalent alternative information such as 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-alt-eq>text 
>equivalents, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-video-captions>captions, 
>and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-Auditory>auditory 
>descriptions at appropriate times can greatly ease the burden for 
>authors. Where such information can be mechanically determined and 
>offered as a choice for the author (e.g., the function of icons in 
>an automatically-generated navigation bar, or expansion of acronyms 
>from a dictionary), the tool can assist the author. At the same 
>time, the tool can reinforce the need for such information and the 
>author's role in ensuring that it is used appropriately in each 
>instance.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>3.1 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-prompt>Prompt 
>the author to provide 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-alt-eq>equivalent 
>alternative information (e.g., 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-video-captions>captions, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Auditory>auditory 
>descriptions, and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-transcript>collated 
>text transcripts for video). [Relative Priority]
>  ???
>Note: Some checkpoints in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 
>2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10] 
>may not apply.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-provide-missing-alt>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 3.1
>3.2 Help the author create structured content and separate 
>information from its presentation. [Relative Priority]
>  ???
>Note: Some checkpoints in Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10] 
>may not apply.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-help-provide-str<span
>></span>ucture>Techniques for checkpoint 3.2
>3.3 Ensure that prepackaged content conforms to the Web Content 
>Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10]. 
>[Relative Priority]
>  For example, include 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-video-captions>captions, 
>an 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-Auditory>auditory 
>description, and a 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-transcript>collated 
>text transcript with prepackaged movies. <<< COMBINED WITH 1.4 >>> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#check-no-default-alt>Refer 
>also to checkpoint 3.4.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-include-pro-descs>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 3.3
>3.3 Do not automatically generate 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-alt-eq>equivalent 
>alternatives. Do not reuse previously authored alternatives without 
>author confirmation, except when the function of the object is known 
>with certainty. [Priority 1]
>  The function of an object may be "known with certainty" when the 
>object is placed by the tool for a specific purpose or the user has 
>defined a purpose. For example, if a tool automatically generates a 
>navigation bar for all pages on a site, it is acceptable to 
>propagate the 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-alt-eq>text 
>equivalent(s) for images that link to searching, the table of 
>contents, etc. When a new object is inserted and the function is 
>unknown, the tool should 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-prompt>prompt 
>the author to enter an appropriate equivalent alternative without 
>providing a default entry, such as the file name. A default entry 
>should only be offered if it is human authored and has been 
>previously associated with the object by the author or within a 
>pre-packaged directory for the tool (ex. clip art gallery). Refer 
>also to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#check-include-pro-descs>checkpoint 
>1.4 and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#check-have-alt-registry>checkpoint 
>3.5.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-no-default-alt>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 3.4
>3.4 Provide functionality for managing, editing, and reusing 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-alt-eq>alternative 
>equivalents for multimedia objects. [Priority 3]
>  Note: These alternative equivalents may be packaged with the tool, 
>written by the author, retrieved from the Web, etc.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-have-alt-registry>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 3.5
>
>Guideline 4. Provide ways of checking and correcting inaccessible content.
>
>Many authoring tools allow authors to create documents with little 
>or no knowledge about the underlying markup. To ensure 
>accessibility, authoring tools must be designed so that they can 
>(where possible, automatically) identify 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-inaccessible-markup>inaccessible 
>markup, and enable its correction even when the markup itself is 
>hidden from the author.
>
>Authoring tool support for the creation of accessible Web content 
>should account for different authoring styles. Authors who can 
>configure the tool's accessibility features to support their regular 
>work patterns are more likely to accept accessible authoring 
>practices (refer to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10#gl-integrate-naturally>guideline 5). 
>For example, some authors may prefer to be alerted to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-accessibility-problem>accessibility 
>problems when they occur, whereas others may prefer to perform a 
>check at the end of an editing session. This is analogous to 
>programming environments that allow users to decide whether to check 
>for correct code during editing or at compilation.
>
>Note: Validation of markup is an essential aspect of checking the 
>accessibility of content.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>4.1 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-check-for>Check 
>for and 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-inform>inform 
>the author of 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessibility-problem>accessibility 
>problems. [Relative Priority]
>  Note: Accessibility problems should be detected automatically where 
>possible. Where this is not possible, the tool may need to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-prompt>prompt 
>the author to make decisions or to manually check for certain types 
>of problems.
>At a minimum, 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-prompt>prompt 
>the author to manually check for specific problems. Ideally, the 
>checks should be automated to the greatest extent possible.
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-notify-on-schedule>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 4.1
>4.2 Assist authors in correcting 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessibility-problem>accessibility 
>problems. [Relative Priority]
>  At a minimum, provide context-sensitive help with the accessibility 
>checking required by 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#check-notify-on-schedule>checkpoint 
>4.1. Ideally, the author should be guided by examples, guidelines 
>and automated tools.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-dont-require-kno<span
>></span>wledge>Techniques for checkpoint 4.2
>4.3 Allow the author to preserve markup not recognized by the tool. 
>[Priority 2]
>  Note: The author may have included or imported markup that enhances 
>accessibility but is not recognized by the tool.
><<< COVERED BY 1.2 >>>
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-notify-changes>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 4.3
>4.3Provide the author with a summary of the document's accessibility 
>status. [Priority 3]
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-progress-feedback>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 4.4
>4.5 Allow the author to transform 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-presentation-markup>presentation 
>markup that is misused to convey structure into 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-structural-markup>structural 
>markup, and to transform presentation markup used for style into 
>style sheets. [Priority 3] <<< TECHNIQUE FOR 3.2 >>>
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-allow-transformation>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 4.5
>
>Guideline 5. Integrate accessibility solutions into the overall 
>"look and feel".
>
>When a new feature is added to an existing software tool without 
>proper integration, the result is often an obvious discontinuity. 
>Differing color schemes, fonts, interaction styles, and even 
>software stability can be factors affecting author acceptance of the 
>new feature. In addition, the relative prominence of different ways 
>to accomplish the same task can influence which one the author 
>chooses. Therefore, it is important that creating accessible content 
>be a natural process when using an authoring tool.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>5.1 Ensure that all functionality (prompts, checkers, information 
>icons, etc.) related to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessible-au-practice>accessible 
>authoring practices is naturally integrated into the overall look 
>and feel of the tool. [Priority 2]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-integrate-features>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 5.1
>5.2 Ensure that 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-accessible-au-practice>accessible 
>authoring practices supporting Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 
>2.0 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#ref-WCAG10>[WCAG10] 
>Priority 1 checkpoints are among the most obvious and easily 
>initiated by the author. [Priority 2]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-visible-means>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 5.2
>
>Guideline 6. Promote accessibility in help and documentation.
>
>Web authors may not be familiar with accessibility issues that arise 
>when creating Web content. Therefore, help and documentation must 
>include explanations of 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-accessibility-problem>accessibility 
>problems, and should demonstrate solutions with examples.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>6.1 Document all features that promote the production of accessible 
>content. [Priority 1]
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-document-features>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 6.1
>6.2 Ensure that creating accessible content is a naturally 
>integrated part of the documentation, including examples. 
>[Priority 2]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-accessibility-everywhere>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 6.2
>6.3 In a dedicated section, document all features of the tool that 
>promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 3]
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-emphasize-universal-benefit>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 6.3 <<< MAKE TECHNIQUE FOR 6.1 >>>
>
>Guideline 7. Ensure that the authoring tool is accessible to authors 
>with disabilities.
>
>The authoring tool is a software program with standard user 
>interface elements and as such must be designed according to 
>relevant user interface accessibility guidelines. When custom 
>interface components are created, it is essential that they be 
>accessible through the standard access mechanisms for the relevant 
>platform so that assistive technologies can be used with them.
>
>Some additional user interface design considerations apply 
>specifically to 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-authoring-tool>Web 
>authoring tools. For instance, authoring tools must ensure that the 
>author can edit (in an 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-Editing>editing 
>view) using one set of stylistic preferences and publish using 
>different styles. Authors with low vision may need large text when 
>editing but want to publish with a smaller default text size. The 
>style preferences of the editing view must not affect the markup of 
>the published document.
>
>Authoring tools must also ensure that the author can navigate a 
>document efficiently while editing, regardless of disability. 
>Authors who use screen readers, refreshable braille displays, or 
>screen magnifiers can make limited use (if at all) of graphical 
>artifacts that communicate the structure of the document and act as 
>signposts when traversing it. Authors who cannot use a mouse (e.g., 
>people with physical disabilities or who are blind) must use the 
>slow and tiring process of moving one step at a time through the 
>document to access the desired content, unless more efficient 
>navigation methods are available. Authoring tools should therefore 
>provide an 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-Editing>editing 
>view that conveys a sense of the overall structure and allows 
>structured navigation.
>
>Note: Documentation, help files, and installation are part of the 
>software and need to be available in an 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-Accessible>accessible 
>form.
>
>Checkpoints:
>
>7.1 Follow Use all applicable operating system and accessibility 
>standards and conventions (Priority 1 for standards and conventions 
>that are essential to accessibility; Priority 2 for those that are 
>important to accessibility; Priority 3 for those that are beneficial 
>to accessibility).
>  The techniques for this checkpoint include references to checklists 
>and guidelines for a number of platforms and to general guidelines 
>for 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/#def-Accessible>accessible 
>applications.
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-use-system-conve<span
>></span>ntions>Techniques for checkpoint 7.1
>7.2 Allow the author to change the presentation within 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Editing>editing 
>views without affecting the document markup. [Priority 1]
>  This allows the author to edit the document according to personal 
>requirements, without changing the way the document is rendered when 
>published. At minimum, this means supporting the display preferences 
>set for the operating system and providing alternate textual 
>representations for non-text elements during editing.
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-independent-styles>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.2
>7.3 Allow the author to edit all 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Property>properties 
>of each 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-element>element 
>and object in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1] <<<COMBINED WITH 
>7.5 >>>
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-edit-elements>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.3
>7.3 Ensure that the 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Editing>editing 
>view allows navigation via the structure of the document in an 
>accessible fashion.
>Enable accessible navigation via document structure during editing 
>[Priority 1]
> 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-navigation-access>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.4
>7.4 Enable editing of the structure of the document in an accessible 
>fashion. [Priority 2]
>Enable editing of the document structure and all properties of each 
>element of the document in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1]
>
><http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-edit-structure>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.5
>7.6 Allow the author to search within 
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203/atag10.html#def-Editing>editing 
>views. [Priority 2]
>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG10-TECHS/#check-have-search>Techniques 
>for checkpoint 7.6 <<< THIS IS ALREADY VERY COMMON, DO WE NEED 
>IT? >>>