- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 08:41:35 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
- Cc: frederick.boland@nist.gov
- Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20060223083615.00c21ec8@mailserver.nist.gov>
In conversation with Jan Richards on February 22 regarding getting a draft ATAG2.0 techniques ready for publishing to the AUWG list, I have noted the following items as (from the conversation) as possibly needing addressing in the ATAG2.0 Guidelines (NOTE: these items all refer to text included or missing from the current ATAG2.0 Guidelines [1]: (1) in SC2 of A.2.5, change "styling" to "presentation" - motivation is "presentation" seems a more generically used word in W3C (used in contrast with "structure" in many discussions)? (2) The "Rationale" for checkpoint A.2.9 states that "authors with disabilities need to have access to a preview", but I thought previews were "optional" in authoring tools that might seek to conform to the ATAG2.0 Guidelines (that is, an authoring tool didn't need to have a preview function in order to claim conformance to the ATAG2.0 Guidelines)? Is there a consistency issue in this regard? (3) Note 1 of A.2.9 stated "This requirement serves, for the preview features only, in lieu of the other user interface accessibility requirements in Part A". This sentence seems unclear to me, so perhaps some clarification is needed as to exactly what is meant by the "other" requirements - which "other" requirements? (4) Somewhere in the ATAG2.0 Guidelines, should it be stated that a "preview" is basically meant a "user agent"? (5) What does "same accessibility features" exactly mean as used in A.2.9 SC1 Part (b)? Perhaps clarification would help? What specifically are these "accessibility features"? (6) The text after "the following must be true.." in A.2.9 SC1 Part (b) seems convoluted and confusing to me. Perhaps this text should be dropped, as it may represent an "edge case/situation" which may never actually occur in practice (or occur rarely) in the context of authoring tools claiming conformance to the ATAG2.0 Guidelines? NOTE: Dropping this text might simplify A.2.9 SC1 Part (b)? Thanks and best wishes Tim Boland NIST [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ATAG20-20051123/
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2006 13:42:16 UTC