Consideration of ATAG2.0 Success Criteria Language and Glossary terms - Tim Boland - 23 Oct 2004

General Comments/Questions on Guidelines

Relationships (logical progression) among multiple items of multi-item success criteria needs further study and explanation - why are the items ordered the way they are?. Also logical progression among the success criteria within a guideline needs further explanation - why are they ordered the way they are? Should the format of these be similar to what WCAG uses, since WCAG and ATAG might be released together? Terminology used in success criteria needs to be as consistent as possible, and linked to definitions in the glossary as much as possible. Also should there be links/checking with the WCAG Glossary? UAAG Glossary? WAI Glossary? W3C Glossary work? NOTE: I did this exercise earlier for the 25 June ATAG2.0 draft, but then redid it for this later version. Some terms referencing following may need new definitions in the glossary

I hope I haven't been too "picky", but perhaps some of these things we could consider to possibly make the document a little clearer, since ultimately these success criteria will be tested, so they should be testable to the maximum extent possible. Also, the items listed should probably be categorized and prioritized more, but I ran out of time.. I am just looking ahead to "testing" all of this, and I would like this to be as specific and objective as possible

Specific Success Criteria Comments/Questions

• Success Criterion 1.1 -

  #1-

  • insert "all" before "authoring tool.."
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • "accessible" - link to definition in glossary?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of ISO16071 (should be a link?) - or is this WCAG? Reference "WCAG-conformant" definition in glossary?
  • how can an "interface" be "content"? "also" seems extraneous?
  • insert "always" after "must"?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ?
  • What is "Web-based" (new definition)?
  #2-
  • insert "all" before "authoring tool.."
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of ISO16071 (should be a link?) - or is this WCAG? Reference "WCAG-conformant" definition in glossary?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ?
  • "accessible" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"?
  • What is "non-Web-based" (new definition)?
• Success Criterion 1.2 -

  #1 -

  • insert "authoring" in front of "tool" and link to definition in glossary
  • insert "each" before "authoring tool interface" (remove "s")
  • insert "must always" before "be accessible.."?
  • What is the difference between an element and an object property?
  • "property" - link to definition in glossary ?
  • What does it mean to be editable (new definition)?
  • What is an "editing method" (new definition)?
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • "accessible" - link to definition?
  • What is "Web-based" (new definition)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of ISO16071 (should be a link?) - or is this WCAG?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ?
  • replace "are also" by "is"?
  #2-
  • insert "authoring" in front of "tool" and link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "each" before "authoring tool interface" (remove "s")
  • insert "always" before "be accessible.."?
  • What is the difference between an element and an object property?
  • "property" - link to definition in glossary ?
  • What does it mean to be "editable" (new definition)?
  • What is an "editing method" (new definition)?
  • definition of "(not)Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • "accessible" - link to definition?
  • what is "non-Web-based" (new definition)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of ISO16071 (should be a link?) - or is this WCAG?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ?
  • replace "are also" by "is"?
• Success Criterion 1.3 -

  #1-

  • "editing view" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • What is the meaning of "display" (stylistic term)? (seems visually-oriented)
  • What is the definition of a "text equivalent" (what makes it "equivalent")?-link to definition somewhere - WCAG?
  • "non-text" - link to definition somewhere?
  #2-
  • "editing view" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • What is the meaning of "display" (used differently in #2 than in #1)?
  • What does it mean to "respect" display settings?
  • What does it mean to be "within a tool"?
  • insert "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary?
  • How are color, contrast, size, and font measured (all stylistic)?
  • "color' and "contrast" overlap? "size" and "font" overlap?
  • "means" for the author to change..
  • remove "content" before "markup" and for "markup" just link to definition of "markup" in glossary
  NOTE: I propose combining definitions for "structural markup' and "presentation markup" into one term "markup" in the glossary for the following reasons: (1) these really is only one definition for "markup" (set of tags that specify the characteristics of a document?) and "markup" can be presentational, structural, or semantic (from the HTML4.0 spec), (2) "markup" is used in different ways throughout these guidelines, and just having one term with one definition should simplify terminology and linking to definition, as well as improve consistency)
• Success Criterion 1.4 -

  #1-

  • What is the definition of an "element hiararchy" (XML? DTD?) - link to definition somewhere?
  • "element" - link to definition in glossary?
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • Should "device independent action be checked with the DIWG? Link to definition of "device-independent" somewhere?
  • How is "editing focus" measured? Link to definition somewhere?
  • What is the difference between a structural element and a non-structural element? Remove "structural" and just link to definition of "element" in glossary?
  • What about the root element? Leaf elements?
  • should be "at the same level" in the hierarchy
  #2 -
  • What is the definition of an "element hiararchy" (XML? DTD?) - link to definition somewhere?
  • "element" - link to definition in glossary?
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • Should "device independent action be checked with the DIWG? Link to definition of "device-independent" somewhere?
  • Does the content of an element include all subelements with their content?
  • link to definition of "content" somewhere - WCAG?
• Success Criterion 1.5 -

  #1-

  • insert "each" before "authoring tool"
  • "authoring tool" - link to definition in glossary
  • What is the definition of a "search function" (new definition)? How extensive must the search function be?
  • "editing view" - link to definition in glossary?
  #2-
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • Say "for any text" instead of just "for text"?
  • How is a "text equivalent" measured? Link to "text equivalent definition in WCAG or elsewhere?
  • Do we want to delete the word "rendered" from in front of "non-text content" (rendering implies presentation, not structure)?
  • "content" - link to definition in WCAG?
  #3-
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • Is the difference between content and markup always clear?
  • "content" - link to definition in WCAG or elsewhere?
  • "markup" - link to definition in glossary (see NOTE previous)
  • Must the authoring tool always respect/understand the author's specifications?
  • How is the author's specification measured by the authoring tool (or other)?
• Success Criterion 2.1 -

  #1-

  • "markup" - link to definition in glossary?
  • replace "written" with "generated" - "written" is visually oriented?
  • insert "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • "markup language" - link to definition in glossary
  • How does one determine what markup language specification is applicable?
  • What happens if there is more than one "applicable" specification?
  • What happens if the applicable specification doesn't define what conformance means in the context of that specification?
• Success Criterion 2.2 -

  #1-

  • What is the definition of a "give priority to " (new definition needed)?
  • What is the definition of a "format" (new definition needed)?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • What is a "published techniques document"? Link to ATAG and/or WCAG Techniques Documents?
  • WCAG checkpoint to levels 1,2, or 3? Relative Priority? Link to WCAG?
  • Or should we say "be WCAG-conformant" and link to definition in glossary? (NOTE: I have proposed replacing "WCAG-capable" with "WCAG-conformant" in glossary, for consistency in terminology)
  • The techniques documents are non-normative, yet they are being referenced in a normative requirement - inconsistent?
• Success Criterion 2.3 -

  #1-

  • add "all authoring" before "tools" and link to definition in glossary
  • add after items (1), (2), (3) "be able to"
  • "accessible" - link to definition in glossary
  • "content" - link to definition in WCAG or elsewhere
  • should add "conditions" after "one of the following.."
  • define "automatically" or put in parentheses ("not authored by hand") like in success criterion 2.1
  • "author" link to definition in glossary
  • "at least one" accessible option instead of "accessible options"?
  • Replace "authoring task with "authoring action" and link to definition in glossary? (NOTE: I think "authoring action" definitely needs a definition in the ATAG glossary)
  • is "method" definition restrictive? "accessible" method? Link to definition of "method" somewhere?

• Success Criterion 2.4 -

  #1-

  • "transformation" - link to definition in glossary
  • "conversion" - link to definition in glossary ("conversion tool"?)
  • Add "supported by the authoring tool" after "transformations and conversions", and link "authoring tool" to definition in glossary?
  • What makes markup "unrecognized" specifically?
  • "markup" - link to definition in glossary (see NOTE previous)
  • "accessibility information" - link to definition in glossary?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • Could we be a little more clear about meaning of "limitations" and "target format"? For "format" link to definition in glossary?
  • Could we identify more specifically what it means to "preserve" information? Just content or content plus context or relative location?
  #2-
  • What makes markup "unrecognized" specifically?
  • "markup" - link to definition in glossary (see NOTE previous)
  • "accessibility information" - link to definition in glossary?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • Do we want to say "and" between "unrecognized markup" and "accessibility information" (like in #1)?
  • "transformation" - link to definition in glossary
  • "conversion" - link to definition in glossary ("conversion tool"?)
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary?
  • "Change is made" to what? More specific ?
  • Could we identify more specifically what it means to "preserve" information? Just content or content plus context or relative location?
• Success Criterion 2.5 -

  #1-

  • "markup" - link to definition in glossary?
  • add "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary
  • "generated" instead of "written" ("written" is visually-oriented?)
  • add "always" after "must"
  • "accessible" - link to definition in glossary?
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of WCAG (should be a link?) ?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ? Must be "WCAG-conformant" (link to definition in glossary)?
• Success Criterion 2.6 -

  #1-

  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • insert "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary?
  • What specifically are "better terms"?
  • What is the difference between "users" and "others" in context of "terms of use"? (both groups "use tool"? - seems inconsistent)
  • "use" and "users" - same root word in two different contexts
  • "add "always" after "must"
  • "accessible" - link to definition in glossary?
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of WCAG (should be a link?) ?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ? Must be "WCAG-conformant" (link to definition in glossary)?
• Success Criterion 3.1 -

  #1-

  • "authoring actions" instead of "actions of author" and then link to new definition in glossary for "authoring actions"?
  • Do we want to say "create" rather than "risk create" accessibility problems?
  • "accessible" - link to definition in glossary?
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of WCAG (should be a link?) ? Must be "WCAG-conformant" (link to definition in glossary)?
  • Say "the..practice appropriate to solving the identified accessibility problem"?
  • Do we want to say "image inserted without alt text"?
  • What is an "invalid" element? XML or HTML or XHTML sense?
  • "editing view" instead of "code view" and then link to definition in glossary?
  • "accessible authoring practice" - link to definition in glossary?
  • instead of "the tool must" replace with "the authoring tool mus t always" and then link "authoring tool" with definition in glossary?
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ?
• Success Criterion 3.2 -

  #1-

  • add "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary
  • add "always" after "must"
  • Want to say "for each applicable requirement of WCAG" and link to the "ATAG References to WCAG" document (instead of "accessibility requirement")?
  • "check" presented to author prior to completion of authoring?
  • difference between "check" and "prompt"? (may have already covered this elsewhere)
  • How can the authoring tool provide a "manual" check (seems to be inconsistent with function of authoring tool - more specific info needed) ?
  • What is "semi-automated" check (new definition)?
  • How is a violation "detected"?
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of WCAG (should be a link?) ? Must be "WCAG-conformant" (link to definition in glossary)?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ?
• Success Criterion 3.3 -

  #1-

  • add "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary
  • add "always" after "must"
  • Want to say "for each applicable requirement of WCAG" and link to the "ATAG References to WCAG" document (instead of "accessibility requirement")?
  • "repair" presented to author prior to completion of authoring?
  • "repair" needs link to definition in glossary ("repairing"?)
  • How can the authoring tool provide a "manual" repair (seems to be inconsistent with function of authoring tool - more specific info needed) ?
  • What is "semi-automated" repair (new definition)?
  • How is a violation "corrected"?
  • definition of "Web content" (link to definition somewhere)?
  • where are "1, 2, or 3" defined in the context of WCAG (should be a link?) ? Must be "WCAG-conformant" (link to definition in glossary)?
  • should be "checkpoint requirements" ?
• Success Criterion 3.4 -

  #1-

  • Definition of "unrecognized non-text object" (image?)
  • insert "authoring" before "tool"
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary
  • "object" - needs new definition in glossary?
  • insert "at all times" before "must"
  • We've said what the author should not do, but what should the author be told to do?
  • "text equivalent" - link to definition in WCAG or elsewhere?
  • add "for that object" after "equivalent"
  • Certain attributes of the non-text object need to be known if a text equivalent is to be tested for? Then, how is a non-text object "unrecognized"?
  #2-
  • How are success criterion #1 and #2 related? Should "recognized" be inserted before "non-text object" in #2 (so that if not #1, possibly #2)?
  • insert "authoring" before "tool"
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary
  • "object" - needs new definition in glossary?
  • insert "at all times" before "must"
  • Seems contradictory "function of the object not known with certainty" and "object for which the tool has a previously-authored equivalent (so function has to be known)"?
  • How can it be determined exactly when the function of the object is known with certainty, as opposed to when it is not?
  • "prompt" - linked to definition in glossary
  • add "in each instance" after "equivalent"
  • add "always" after "must"
  • why is "may" in the second sentence? Either change "may" to "must always" or remove sentence
• Success Criterion 3.5 -

  #1-

  • What is a "non-text" and "object" (link to definitions somewhere)?
  • What does it mean to be "previously inserted"?
  • "authoring tool" instead of "tool" (link to definition in glossary)?
  • insert "always" after "must"
  • Is "suggest" the same as "prompt"?
  • What is "previously authored textual equivalent" (more specific or link to definition)?
  • Success criterion 1.3 mentions "text (not textual) equivalent" - consistent terminology?
• Success Criterion 3.6 -

  #1-

  • insert "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary
  • When must the tool provide this option? At least once? Or should "always" be inserted after "must"? Since "current" is mentioned maybe the latter?
  • at end insert "prior to completion of authoring"? Maybe a definition is needed for "completion of authoring"?
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary?
  • It sounds like to provide "current" accessibility problems the option would have to be repeated multiple times
  • Is the view accessible? Also "view" is visually oriented? Maybe "access" is a better word than "view"?
  • Are the accessibility problems mutually exclusive? Ordered in terms of priority/severity?
  • "accessibility problems" - link to definition in glossary? (but the definition in glossary only refers to "Web content")?
• Success Criterion 3.7 -

  #1-

  • Are features the same as functions (definition of "feature" somewhere)?
  • Definition of "play a role" Influence?
  • "accessible" - link to definition in glossary?
  • "content" - link to WCAG definition (if there is one)?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • documented in "all" help "mechanisms" (instead of "system")? Or we could use "documentation" and link to definition in glossary?
  • What if the tool has no help mechanisms?
  • add at end "associated with the authoring tool (and link "authoring tool" to definition in glossary)?
• Success Criterion 3.8 -

  #1-

  • remove "code" and link "markup" to definition in glossary (see NOTE previous)?
  • What are "views of the authoring interface"? Is this the same as "editing view" which is defined in the glossary? Maybe use "editing view" instead? "View" is visual?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • Why don't we say "be WCAG-conformant and link "WCAG-conformant" to definition in glossary(see NOTE previous)?
  • Why do we need the "regardless" clause?
  • "accessible(not -ity) authoring practice" - link to definition in glossary?
• Success Criterion 3.9-

  #1-

  • replace "the" with "all authoring tool documentation" and link both "authoring tool" and "documentation" to definitions in glossary
  • What happens if there isn't any documentation associated with the authoring tool?
  • add "always" after "must"?
  • Is "suggested" the same as "prompted" here (we then could link to "prompt" definition in glossary perhaps)?
  • meaning of "content creation workflow descriptions"
  • "content" - link to definition in WCAG?
  • "workflow" - link to definition in glossary
  • what are "accessibility related " features"?
  • "accessibility" - link to definition in glossary?
  • insert "authoring" before "tool"
  #2-
  • "feature" - needs a new definition?
  • insert "all authoring" before "tool(s)"
  • Which "particular" and "accessibility-related" feature?
  • "accessibility" - link to definition in glossary?
  • How determine "lack"? More than one feature missing?
  • "workflow" - link to definition in glossary"? What happens if there isn't a workflow description?
  • What is a "workaround"? Does the workaround have to be associated with the workflow description or can it be separate?
  • Say "all workflow descriptions associated with the authoring tools"? (then link "authoring tool" with definition in glossary)
  • add "always" after "must"
  • say "feature(s)"
• Success Criterion 4.1 -

  #1-

  • "authoring action" - link to newly-created definition in glossary?
  • "results in" instead of "has" (or "has several choices of")
  • "more than one" vs. "several"?
  • results in "several alternative implementations of markup"?
  • "markup" - link to definition in glossary (see NOTE previous) in several places
  • changed with "presentation markup" or style sheets..
  • those "implementations of markup" that are "WCAG-conformant" and then link to definition of "WCAG-conformant" in glossary?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • higher prominence in the authoring tool (and then link to definition of "authoring tool" in glossary?
  • "objectively" measuring prominence?
  • those "implementations of markup" that are "WCAG-conformant" and then link to definition of "WCAG-conformant" in glossary?
• Success Criterion 4.2 -

  #1-

  • "all" continuously active processes associated with the "authoring tool" (link to definition in glossary)?
  • What is a "continuously active process"? Link to newly-created definition in glossary?
  • What does it mean precisely to "implement"?
  • "accessibility", "(prompt)ing", "checking", "repairing", "documentation" - all linked to definitions in glossary?
  • What precisely is a "documentation function"?
  • add "always" after "must"
  #2-
  • what does it mean precisely in this context to "disable" a process?
  • say "any of these continuously active processes associated with the authoring tool", and then link "authoring tool" to definition in glossary
  • link "continuously active process" to definition in glossary?
  • is there any dependency among the continuously active processes? Can one be disabled but not another?
  • add "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary
  • say ", then for each such disabled process, the authoring tool must.."
  • add "always" after "must"
  • say "the author's choice" instead of "their choice", and link "author" to definition in glossary
  • What specifically would the "consequences" be (examples)?
  • say at end of sentence "in advance of the disabling"
  #3-
  • say "All accessibility prompting, checking, repair and documentation functions must.. (for consistency with #1)
  • "accessibility", "(prompt)ing", "checking", "repairing", "documentation" - all linked to definitions in glossary?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • how does one measure objectively "prominence"?
  • same prominence as "all other'' "mandatory functions" of the tool instead of "other information" (seems a little vague)?
  • add "authoring" before "tool" and link to definition in glossary
• Success Criterion 4.3 -

  #1-

  • "accessibility" and "prompting" linked to definitions in glossary?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • "features" (new definition?) of the "authoring tool"?
  • link "authoring tool" and "author" to definitions in glossary?
  • How does one objectively deterimine "assist with author decision-making"?
  • "accessibility", ---"(prompt)ing"--?, "checking", "repairing", "documentation" - all linked to definitions in glossary? Why is "prompting" left out of this list (consistency with previous lists?)
  • How does one determine "made available"? Just say "available to author"?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • How does one determine the point of "completion of authoring workflow"?
  • What is "authoring workflow"? Maybe more explanation needed?
  • "workflow" - link to definition in glossary?
  #2-
  • What is a "mechanism" (new definition needed)?
  • Should say "mechanism associated with the authoring tool" and then link "authoring tool" to definition in glossary
  • "author" - link to definition in glossary
  • repair functions vs. repair? Why not just put "functions" at end of phrase like in #1 of SC4.2 (for consistency)
  • new definition of "authoring action" in glossary?
  • heuristic for how to sequence in different situations?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • What does it mean specifically to "integrate" accessibility? Integrate into what?
• Success Criterion 4.4 -

  #1-

  • say "all authoring tool interfaces" instead of "the authoring interface" for consistency with SC1.1 wording, and then link "authoring tool interface" to definition in glossary?
  • "accessibility", "(prompt)ing", "checking", "repairing", "documentation" - all linked to definitions in glossary? Add "functions" at end of this list (for consistency with SC4.2 wording, plus we're comparing function to function?)
  • add "always" after "must"
  • say "authoring tool interfaces for all comp.." instead of "the authoring interface for comp.."
  • how does one objectively determine a "comparable" function?
  • how is "matching" objectively measured for design, operation, comprehensiveness?
  • more specific measures for design metaphors, artistic sophistication needed?
  • "visual" refers to only one type of accessibility issue (a visual one)?
  • number of sizes, fonts, colors supported? Sizes of what? Do fonts and sizes overlap?
  • how is breadth and depth of functionality coverage measured objectively?
• Success Criterion 4.5 -

  #1-

  • say "all authoring tool accessibility prompting, checking, repair, and documentation functions" (for consistency with language in previous success criteria)
  • , "authoring tool', "accessibility", "(prompt)ing", "checking", "repairing", "documentation" - all linked to definitions in glossary in several places in sentence?
  • definition of "functions"? "functions" of the authoring tool?
  • add "always" after "must"
  • What is meaning of "match"?
  • "all other" instead of "the other"
  • "of the authoring tool" instead of "of the tool"
  • "respectively" should come after "functions"?
  • How does one objectively determine "degree"?
  • difference between prompting and checking adequately explained somewhere?
  • number of "authoring tool" options controllable by..?
  • "controlled" (add "by the author")?
  • link "author" to definition in glossary in several places?

Specific Glossary of Terms and Definitions Comments/Questions

Is this glossary normative? It would seem that it would have to be if terms used in normative success criteria reference the glossary definitions. At some point the terms in the glossary could be linked back into the Guidelines to form an index of the Guidelines.

• "Accessibility" - Are we sure that in fact "accessibility" and "accessible" are the same? For "Web content" link to WCAG definition? For "authoring tool" link to definition? For "authors" link to definition in glossary? Do we need a definition or additional explanation for "Web-based" or "not Web-based"? For "usable" do we need to point to a definition of usability somewhere? Per NOTE previous, this should be stated as "As mentioned in this document, accessibility refers to .." and then directly give bullets 1, 2, and 3. Then link "document" to definition in this glossary?
• "Accessibility Information" - necessary "and sufficient"? accessible authoring practice "to occur"? Per NOTE previous, say "Accessibility information is any information..
• "Accessibility Problem" - Shouldn't there be one definition (with two parts) for "accessibility problem" (instead of the three definitions there are now)? Say "a success criterion"? Instead of directly mentioning Guideline 1 by number, do we want to say "the Guideline on making the authoring tool itself accessible"? That way, document maintenance may be easier if the Guidelines are ever reordered Per NOTE previous, say "An accessibility problem is .." and then give the items. I don't think that the "Resolving ATAG References to WCAG" sentences belong in these definitions (they should be moved or deleted) "Web content" should be linked to a definition (WCAG?). I would like to restate "that fails to meet some requirement.." to be "that is not WCAG-conformant", and then link "WCAG-conformant" to a definition later in this glossary
• "Accessible Authoring Practice" - Per NOTE previous, say "accessible authoring practice is a series of authoring actions resulting in Web content modifications made by the author or by the authoring tool that increase the likelihood.." However, what about accessible authoring practice for non-Web content? If "Web content" is kept, it should be linked to a definition (WCAG?) Also, "authoring tool" and "author" should be linked to definitions in the glossary
• "Alert" - what is the difference between an alert and a prompt? Per NOTE previous, say "An alert is a mechanism? that draws.." Also, do we want to say at the end of the sentence "associated with the authoring tool"? "It" should then be replaced by "An alert" Then "author" and "authoring tool" should be linked with definitions in the glossary
• "Attribute" -Per NOTE previous, say "An attribute as mentioned in this document refers to its definition from SGML and..", and then link "document" to its definition in this glossary? I'm not sure that the "Element types .." clause belongs in a definition; I would just refer to SGML and/or XML. The next sentence " Some attributes.." is useful but may belong elsewhere (doesn't really belong in a definition?) ?
• "Auditory Description" - provides "aural" information?
• "Author" - link "authoring tool" to definition in glossary
• "Authoring Action" - needs to be defined (I think it is an important term, and not the same as "accessible authoring practice")?
• "Authored by hand" - per NOTE previous, say "Authoring by hand is when the author performs a specific authoring action to generate content, as by typing.. " Then "author" and "authoring action" should be linked to definitions in this glossary' "content" should be linked to an appropriate definition (WCAG?) Do we want to include all types of content in addition to text strings?
• "Authoring Tool" - mabye take out "section 1.1" part in case numbers change?
• "Authoring Interface" - per NOTE previous, for consistency, say "An authoring interface refers to the display and control mechanisms.. Do we want to consider an interface a "boundary" of some sort between the author and the authoring tool? Both "author" and "authoring tool" need to be linked to definitions in the glossary. I don't think the second sentence is needed in this definition (may be useful elsewhere)?
• "Captions" what about confusion with the table caption elements?
• "Continuously Active Process" - needs definition?
• "Conversion Tool" - Maybe we just want to define "conversion" here since the word is used alone in several success criteria? Perhaps "feature" needs a definition? Link to "transformation" definition in glossary for "transforms"? Say "transforms content in one format to equivalent content in another format (markup)". Then "content", "format", and "markup" could be linked to definitions.
• "Checking" - Per NOTE previous, say "Checking is the process.." Do we want to say just "content" (with link to definition) instead of "Web content"? Also "accessibility problems" should be linked to definition in glossary. Do we really need the remaining sentences in a definition? Perhaps move them to techniques?
• "Document" - Do we want to say "a document is a structure of elements along with any associated content; the elements used are defined by a markup language? Then link "element", "content", and "markup" to appropriate definitions?
• "Documentation" - remove redundant "Documentation" word at beginning. "authoring tool" and "workflow" can be linked to definitions found in this glossary
• "Editing View" - "authoring tool" - link to definition in glossary? Do we want to say "by the "author" at end of sentence, and then link "author" to definition in glossary?
• "Element" - Do we need a definition for "object" (used often in success criteria language)? link "document" to definition in this glossary? Is there a definition of "element" in other W3C documentation (HTML, XML) that we could point to? I don't think the second sentence belongs in this definition; perhaps we could just reference HTML and XML without any explanation?
• "Equivalent alternative" - per NOTE previous, say that "Equivalent content refers to content that is "equivalent".." For "content" link to definition (WCAG?)? For second sentence, instead of "authoring content consumers" just say "authors", and then link both "authors" and "accessible authoring practices" to definitions in this glossary? I don't think that the remaining sentences belong in this definition - maybe move to techniques?
• "Format" - new definition needed?
• "Inform" - Do we want to say "event or situation associated with an authoring tool"? Then link "author" and "authoring tool" to definitions in glossary? This definition sounds like the definition for an "alert" - how is it different? How is an alert different from a prompt (maybe needs more explanation somewhere? Aren't sound and flash kinds of alerts?
• "Information Icon" - per NOTE previous, say "An information icon is any.." Do we want to say "graphical object associated with the authoring tool" instead of "graphic"? "author" - link to definition in glossary?
• "Markup Language" - per NOTE previous, say "A markup language is a syntax and/or set of rules used to manage markup", and then link to "markup" definition following?
• "Markup" (was "Presentation Markup"?) - (from webopedia.com - markup is "a collection of tags used to specify a document" - and then link to "document" definition in glossary? Say that markup can be structural, presentation, or semantic? (NOTE: I would like to replace everything currently following "Presentation Markup" term with the previous text)
• "Object" - new definition needed (appears frequently in success criteria language)?
• "Prominence" - say "authoring tool interface" and link to definition in glossary? Is heuristic "objective"? Replace "users" with "authors" and link to definition in glossary? Replace "system" with "authoring tool" and link to definition in glossary? Instead of 'these guidelines", say "this document" and link to definition in glossary? I think that all the bulleted items following should be in techniques and not in glossary)
• "Prompt" - Say "in this document (link to def?) a prompt is a mechanism initiated by the authoring tool (link to def?) designed to urge, suggest and encourage the author (link to def?) when using the authoring tool (link to def?)" I think that the text from the second sentence to the end can be moved to a techniques document - I don't think it belongs in a definition?
• "Property" - Say " a property is a characteristic of an object (link to def?)(or item?) - "element" is too restrictive?" Again, I think that all other text after the first sentence can be moved to a techniques document - doesn't belong in a definition?
• "Repairing" - per NOTE previous, say "Repairing is the process by.." Just say "content" (link to def somewhere (WCAG?) instead of "Web content"? "accessibility problems" - link to definition in glossary? Everything after the first sentence I feel could be moved to a techniques document - doesn't belong in a definition?
• "Structural Markup" - folded into "Markup" definition previous?
• "Transcript" - Last sentence belongs in techniques document, not in definition?
• "Techniques" - per NOTE previous, say that "Techniques are informative suggestions.."
• "Transformation" - "document" - link to definition in glossary and "object" - new definition in glossary? Definition/example of "equivalent"? Second time say "document or object" instead of just "object"? Say "Such processes include:" instead of just "This"? "markup" - link to definition in glossary?
• "Typical Author" - say "authoring tool proficiency" and link to "authoring tool" definition in glossary? "accessibility" - link to definition in glossary? Do we want to provide a reference to a usability resource for elaboration on meaning of "typical"?
• "User Agent" - Do we want to say "content" (link to def?) instead of "Web content"? Point to a UAAG resource for this item?
• "View" - per NOTE previous, say "A view is a rendering of content (link to def?) by an authoring tool (link to def?). Everything after the first sentence move to a techniques document or elsewhere (doesn't belong in a definition)?
• "WCAG-conformant"(was "WCAG-capable format"?) - say that "WCAG-conformant content (link to def?) is content that meets the requirements of WCAG (link)? as specified in the "ATAG References to WCAG" (link) document". This would replace the current text following "WCAG-capable format" (NOTE: My understanding is that WCAG techniques documents are non-normative, so can't be used in normative reference from ATAG or WCAG?)
• "Workflow" - per NOTE previous, say that "Workflow is a customary sequence of .. "