reorganization proposal: my action item from 20 June AUWG telecon

Per my "action item" from 20 June 2005 AUWG teleconference,
I am submitting the following for consideration:

----------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION


In this reorganization proposal, I considered the
original proposal [1] - denoted as "old" -
great job, Barry!, and made the following
changes to create "new" - SC is success criterion -:


1. combined old A.1.3 SC1 and old A.1.4 SC1 into one new A.1.3 SC1,
added a part b, and made slight modifications to the wording


2. combined old A.1.3 SCs2 and 3 and old A.1.4 SCs2 and 3 into one new 
A.1.3 SC2,
added a part b, and made slight modifications to the wording


3. combined old A.1.3 SC4 and old A.1.4 SC4 into one new A.1.3 SC3,
and made slight modifications to the wording


4. did not include old A.1.3 SC5 and old A.1.4 SC5, since I would argue
  that those SCs are already covered by other SCs, as mentioned following.


5. kept old A.1.7 SC1 and SC2, and made slight modifications to the wording to
create new A.1.6 SCs1 and 2.


The goal of these changes was to address the measureable, objective,and
  testable aspects of the SCs, while attempting to preserve
the original semantic intent of the language.  I apologize in advance if I 
misunderstood
any of the semantic intent.  I made no changes to rationales or techniques, and
kept the priority levels of the original proposal.

Every term in parentheses I felt may need a definition, or I had a question 
about
the existing definition.


------------------------------------------


NEW A.1.3 SCs:

1. a.  The (authoring interface - is current definition sufficient?)
  of the (authoring tool) must always support: (visual presentation
  accessibility settings), and (audio presentation accessibility settings)
  of the (current host operating system - needs definition?), and/or
the (platform user interface - needs definition?), necessary for an
(accessible authoring interface) to occur, except where
such support would lead to (authoring interface accessibility problems).

    b. If other (configuration) necessary to resolve such (authoring interface
accessibility problems) needs to occur, documentation must be provided by the
(authoring tool) on such configuration.  -PRIORITY 1-


2. a. The (authoring tool) must always support all (additional settings)
  of the (current host operating system), and/or (platform user interface),
  necessary for an (accessible authoring interface) to occur, except where
such support would lead to (authoring interface accessibility problems).
The (authoring tool) must provide (documentation) of all (accessibility
information) related to all such settings.

    b. If other (configuration) necessary to resolve such (authoring interface
accessibility problems) needs to occur, documentation must be provided by the
(authoring tool) on such configuration.  -PRIORITY 2-


3. The (authoring tool) must always provide (accessible alternatives) to
any (visual alerts - needs definition?), such as
dynamic status lines, or (audio alerts - needs definition?), such as
sounding the system bell, in the (authoring interface). -PRIORITY 1-


---------------------------


NEW A.1.6 SCs

1. The (authoring tool) must always assist the (author) in creating
  and validating both (labels) and (label associations) for all (controls)
in the (authoring interface), such that the following
(control state) information is always provided to the (author): role
(i.e, type of control), name (i.e., usage in the user interface), and
  value (focusable, enabled?).  -PRIORITY 1-


5. For all (web content types) that support (explicit labeling 
relationships), the
(authoring tool) must always assist the (author) in creating such relationships
for all such web content produced by the (authoring tool). -PRIORITY 1?-


------------------------------------


Issues Related To This Reorganization Proposal:


Issue #1: What "class of products" is being tested in these SCs?  Is the
"class of product" the authoring tool, or the host, or the host operating 
system?
    ATAG2.0 [2] defines "authoring tools" as the class of products to be 
tested by
  the ATAG2.0 specification .


Issue #2: For old A.1.3 SC5, is this SC already partially or completely
  covered by WCAG 2.0 Guidelines [3], for example SCs for Guidelines 1.1 
and 1.2, or
  by another ATAG2.0 SC (B.2.1)?  Or is old A.1.3 SC5 stating something like
"The authoring tool must provide specific assistance to the author to make
  any inaccessible content produced by the authoring tool "not 
(WCAG-conformant)"
accessible content ("WCAG-conformant").


Issue #3: Do changes proposed in INTRODUCTION preserve semantic intent of
original proposal?


Issue #4: Are new definitions needed, or do existing definitions need to be
  modified, for all terms in parentheses NOTE: specific definitions issues
are also mentioned following?


Issue #5: The original proposal has different priority levels within a
particular SC, which is different from the current organization of ATAG2.0,
but similar to the WCAG2.0 organization. Which organization do we want for 
ATAG2.0?


Issue #6: How would these "old or new" SCs "relate" -fit in?-
with the other SCs in the "reworked" ATAG2.0?


Issue #7: What does it mean precisely to "validate" a label and/or
label association?  How could "clearly associated" be objectively testable?


Issue #8: How does "audio presentation" relate to existing "audio
description" definition?


Issue #9: Do we need to define "host"?  Is use of that term necessary in 
the SCs?


Issue #10: "visual presentation accessibility settings" definition - includes
at least settings for color values and contrast, font families and sizes,
(presentation rates and delays - definition needed?), (natural) language
  used (Is this covered by WCAG?), and (locale-based formatting - What is
this?  Needs definition..)   Is this definition for "visual presentation 
accessibility
settings" OK?


Issue #11: "audio presentation accessibility settings" definition - includes
at least settings for:  tone variation, volume, and duration of alert sounds,
and volume, start, stop/pause, and playback rate of audio clips and audio/video
  combinations - note: some terms need definition?)  Is this definition for
  "audio presentation accessibility settings" OK?


Issue #12: "additional settings" definition - those settings other than (visual
presentation accessibility settings) or (audio presentation accessibility 
settings).
Is this definition for "additional settings" OK?



[1]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005AprJun/0080.html
[2]: http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca/public/auwg/guidelines.html
[3]: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 12:56:44 UTC