- From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 10:59:18 -0400
- To: WAI-AUWG List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>, WAI-CG List <w3c-wai-cg@w3.org>
(I'm cc'ing this to WAI-CG due to its cross-group nature) On yesterday's AUWG call I took an action item to consider how ATAG 2.0's "Web Content Accessibility Benchmark" relates to WCAG 2.0's "Accessibility Supported". URLs: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2007/WD-ATAG20-20070615/WD-ATAG20-20070615.html#conf-benchmark http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#accessibility-support NOTE: I will use "technology/content-type" since these different terms are used in pretty much the same way (more on that later). SOME INTERESTING PARALLELS: WCAG 2.0 "Accessibility Supported" - The purpose of "Accessibility Supported" is specify when it is ok (from an accessibility standpoint) to use a technology/content-type (HTML, PDF, etc) in a Web page. Basically, it is ok when (1) there is user agent support for the technology/content-type and (2) the user agent -> assistive technology chain works. - The conformance claim appears to require documenting accessibility- support for any Web technology/content-type used either by pointing to a list compiled by a technology/content-type builder (e.g. W3C, Adobe) or by creating their own. ATAG 2.0 "Web Content Accessibility Benchmark" - The purpose of the "Web Content Accessibility Benchmark" when it is ok to provide accessible-authoring support for a technology/content-type (HTML, PDF, etc). Basically, it is ok when there is an explanation of how the technology/content-type can be used to meet all of the requirements in a content accessibility guideline (e.g. WCAG 2.0). - The conformance claim requires specifying a Benchmark document for any Web technology/content-type included in the claim by pointing to one compiled by a technology/content-type builder (e.g. W3C, Adobe) or by creating their own. POSSIBILITIES FOR SYNCHRONIZATION: 1. ATAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.0 should use a common term for technology/content-type. AUWG's problem with the current WCAG 2.0 definition of "technology" ("markup language, programming language, style sheet, data format, or API ") is the appearance of the term "API" in the list. For the record, ATAG 2.0's current definition of "content-type" is "A data format, programming or markup language that is intended to be retrieved and rendered by a user agent (e.g., HTML, CSS, SVG, PNG, PDF, Flash, JavaScript or combinations).". 2. AUWG might want to require that a technology/content-type also be "accessibility-supported" in the WCAG 2.0 sense. 3. Some synchronization of wording of the two concepts, since at the moment they are phrased very differently (the following is just an idea): WCAG2: "User Agent Accessibility Support" as in: A technology/content-type has "User Agent Accessibility Support" (Note: User agent definition in the WCAG2 Glossary includes Assistive Technologies) ATAG2: "Web Content Accessibility Benchmark" as in: A technology/content-type has a "Web Content Accessibility Benchmark" Cheers, Jan -- Jan Richards, M.Sc. User Interface Design Specialist Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC) Faculty of Information Studies University of Toronto Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca Web: http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca Phone: 416-946-7060 Fax: 416-971-2896
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 14:59:11 UTC