suggestions for Prompting of Real-time/live authored content

HSwayne's action item for the 3/11/02 teleconference...

 

Suggest adding a new high level section to the end of the current
Appendix A: Techniques for user prompting
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2002/WD-ATAG10-TECHS-20020308/appa.html>
document to explain this particular issue in more detail.

 


Prompting of real-time/live authored content


If an authoring tool is producing real-time/live content the ability to
wait for the critical point (i.e. publishing) to intrusively alert or
prompt the author is lost.  While at the same time, authors in this
environment tend to be less receptive to intrusive alerts and prompts.
Below are some suggested techniques for authoring tools of
real-time/live content:

 

*	If the author is only communicating with one other individual,
assume that they know each other and will communicate in a way that is
acceptable to both users.  Therefore by default use unintrusive prompts
and alerts.  To illustrate this consider an author communicating with a
hard-of-hearing associate, it is unlikely that the author would need to
provide a textural equivalent to an audio files, since it would be
unlikely for the author to send this individual that type of document,
opting instead to rely on textual based communication.
*	If the author is communicating with a small number of
individuals, assumed some may be unidentified users with disabilities.
Again is recommended to use unintrusive prompt and alerts.
*	If the author is preparing for a live presentation, the
authoring tool does have the opportunity to provide both intrusive and
unintrusive prompts and alerts as the tool becomes aware of the content
the author is planning on presenting.  To illustrate this consider a
professor preparing for an online class, as she imports an image to be
used in her lecture she could be prompted to provide an alternative
representation of that image.
*	If the author is communicating with a large number of
individuals, and no preparation environment is provided, a mechanism
should be provided by the tool to designate an individual from within
the live community to provide the necessary supplemental information to
assist an individual with a disability.  In a conventional meeting room
this individual could be a sign language interpreter or an individual
quietly providing an explanation of visual images to the person sitting
next to them.  In a large chat environment, this communication could be
provided through a separate channel between the designated assistant and
the participants needing this alternative information (moving us back to
a one-on-one communication model).  This suggestion also preserves the
main communication environment/flow.

 

As always is most effective to allow the author to choose the types of
prompts they would like to receive.  Allowing the author to also choose
to the type of prompts based on the type of real-time/live communication
they are using would be even more powerful.

 

 

Heather Swayne

Microsoft Corporation

Accessible Technologies Group

 

P.S. this e-mail was written using voice dictation technology so please
excuse any "voice mistakes"