- From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 08:23:25 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
I have spoken with Bob Regan and we have agreed on the following: (1) The bundling clause does not force larger authoring tools to collaborate with or be dependent on smaller tools (such a plug-ins), a relationship that has the potential to delay the larger tool when the smaller makes design changes or suffers production delays. Instead the bundling clause is to be understood (and if necessary rewritten) to emphasize that the "bundle" is only a piece of information for purchasers, not a collaboration requirement. "Bundles" are also not necessarily exclusive. A tool without repair functionality could conform to ATAG bundled with any one of a number of third party evaluation and repair tools. (2) The minimal success criteria for checkpoints 3.2 and 3.3 (i.e. that an authoring tool or "bundle" [see (1)] provide a "manual" system for checking and repairing content for accessibility) are satisfactory. The wording should be clarified to emphasize that manual checking consists of basic instructions for the user on how to check for a problem themselves (e.g. look for IMG tags without "Alt" attributes...) and manual repairing consists of basic instructions for the user on how to repair problems themselves (e.g. add an "Alt" attribute with a value string that describes the image...). Of course, such rudimentary systems leave open a large potential market for automated evaluation and repair tools that could be filled by third party tools and/or large tools themselves. (3) The conformance scheme of ATAG 2.0 might benefit from a change in which priorities are set according to whether the requirement refers to each individual tool or to the enterprise-wide authoring system. (4) The representatives from developers of the largest tools (DW, GoLive, HomePage Builder, FrontPage(?)) should be asked for an interim report on how they believe their tools currently fare with regard to ATAG 2.0 as this is important information for the group. Cheers, Jan
Received on Friday, 4 March 2005 13:23:44 UTC