Re: ATAG requirements on accessible authoring interfaces

Phill,

Yes, it was my intention to allow the solution you describe. I agree 
with your two re-wordings and will add them to my proposal.

Cheers,
Jan



Phill Jenkins wrote:
> 
> Jan, thanks for the full context and Success Criteria.  But I guess I 
> still don't understand Roberto's comment about it being difficult or 
> impossible for web based tools.
> 
> Another question: Is it possible to meet the success criteria with a 
> combination of both the authoring tool and the operating environment 
> settings?  For example, suppose the authoring tool respects the 
> operating environment settings and therefore inherits the larger menu 
> bar, tool bar icons, scroll bars, etc., but doesn't enlarge the content, 
> but does provide a zoom and contrast feature separately.  I would think 
> that the combination of authoring tool features & os features meet the 
> criteria and more importantly allow the user with the vision impairment 
> to successfully get the editing job done.
> 
> does success criteria (b) need and "and/or", or is the "or" sufficient?
> * (b) using either the authoring tool and/or via the ...
> 
> And does the (c) range need to be "the same as", or "at least as good" 
> of a range?  For example, zoom ranges provided by browsers may be 
> "better" in that they are larger than the font enlargement settings 
> provided by the Windows operating environment settings.
> 
> Regards,
> Phill Jenkins
> 
> 
> 
> *Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>*
> 
> 04/25/2005 01:21 PM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	Phill Jenkins/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
> cc
> 	w3c-wai-au@w3.org
> Subject
> 	Re: ATAG requirements on accessible authoring interfaces
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Phill,
> 
> Just to be clear, here is the complete proposed checkpoint:
> 
> ---
> 
> FROM_UAAG.5 Ensure that visual displays are configurable. [Priority 1]
> [Adapted from UAAG 4.1, 4.2, 4.3]
> 
> Rationale: Authors with low vision may require that text be rendered at
> a size larger than the size specified by the authoring tool's defaults.
> authors with color blindness may need to impose or prevent certain color
> combinations.
> 
> Techniques:
> 
> Success Criteria:
> 
> 1. The author must be able to configure all text (size, font family, and
> foreground/background color) and the non-text objects (size, color):
> * (a) for the entire authoring interface (including content within
> editing views),
> * (b) using either the authoring tool or via the operating environment
> settings,
> * (c) in a range that is the same as that available in the operating
> environment settings.
> 
> ---
> 
> So the idea here is that even though Zoomtext, etc. do a great job for
> many people, some amount of built-in configurability is still desirable.
> Success criteria (c) sets the range of configurability to be the same as
> that available in the operating environment (e.g. the Windows Display
> settings). In other words, a client-side authoring tool would meet this
> checkpoint by respecting the display settings of the operating system. A
> Web-based tool would meet the settings by respecting the browser display
> settings (which the browser may in turn have passed through from
> operating system settings).
> 
> I hope this helps.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:
>  >
>  > ----- Original Message -----
>  > From: "Phill Jenkins" <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
>  > To: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
>  > Cc: "Jan Richards" <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>; <jongund@uiuc.edu>;
>  > <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
>  > Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 7:21 PM
>  > Subject: Re: ATAG requirements on accessible authoring interfaces
>  >
>  >
>  > Impossible? Isn't this the responsibility of the assistive technology?
>  > ZoomText and Majic are just a few of the magnifiers that handle this all
>  > the time.  The "chrome" of the browser also has some of the
>  > responsibility
>  > - for example the zoom feature in the browsers.  The point here is that
>  > the client is doing the magnification, not the server that is sending
>  > the
>  > HTML in a Web based authoring tool.  Another point here - the
>  > requirement
>  > or need of authors with low vision is valid, but the placement of the
>  > responsibility of the solution on the authoring tool vendor is not, in
>  > my
>  > opinion, correct or most efficient.  That is the role of the assistive
>  > technology.  Only the enablement of the authoring tool to not prevent
>  > the
>  > use of magnifiers and zoom features is required here.
>  >
>  > Roberto Scano:
>  > I think this is not responsability of the assistive tecnology: ATAG
>  > refer to the authoring tools (web or "client side").
>  >
>  >
> 
> -- 
> Jan Richards, M.Sc.
> User Interface Design Specialist
> Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC), University of Toronto
> 
>   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
>   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
>   Phone: 416-946-7060
>   Fax:   416-971-2896
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Jan Richards, M.Sc.
User Interface Design Specialist
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC), University of Toronto

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896

Received on Monday, 25 April 2005 18:54:15 UTC