- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 15:37:29 -0600
- To: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Ben Caldwell'" <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu>, "'GVAN'" <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>
- Message-ID: <013d01c738ed$5e8222e0$88e8710a@NC84301>
To follow up on previous Trace comment #7 7.) definition of "available programmatically" - This seems only to say that it's possible for the information to be communicated, not that it has been. Is there something in ATAG that requires that information that "should" be available to AT actually is available? The concern here is that these SC would be met if the info is available regardless of whether AT actually make use of it. One example of this is: If a company creates a new technology (and an author tool for it), should the technology be considered accessible if the author tool exposes information in a way that is not compatible with any existing AT? What is the good? It is not directly accessible and it is not compatible with any AT. It could SOMEDAY be accessible - but not today. And it may never be. Should we say that that is better than closed with no possibility of access? Probably. But shouldn't it be different than technologies that can actually be used by people with disabilities? Current draft does not seem to do this. In WCAG 'programmatically determined' relies on 'accessibility-supported' technologies. Gregg ------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison < <http://trace.wisc.edu/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848 DSS Player at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/>
Received on Monday, 15 January 2007 21:37:47 UTC