- From: Michael A Squillace <masquill@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:19:47 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF00131C13.6772126C-ON8525742B.00524E7A-8625742B.00542486@us.ibm.com>
There is a possibility that both A1.2 and A2.3 might remain distinct. We
can think of A1.2 as having three (rather than its current two)
requirements:
A1.2.1 There must be and underlying accessibility architecture on the
platform upon which the authoring tool is to be executed
A1.2.2 user interface chrome, content display, and other non-web-based
authoring user interfaces implement and leverage the accessibility
architecture wherever possible
A1.2.3 If any non-Web-based authoring user interface functionality is not
supported by the implemented accessibility platform architecture(s), then
a separate accessible alternative for that functionality that is supported
by the implemented accessibility platform architecture(s) is provided and
a description of the inaccessible functionality appears in the conformance
claim.
A2.3 could remain as is with a statement about the fact that it concerns
enablement using (and not implementation of) the platform accessibility
architecture. The techniques for A2.3 suggest this. For instance,
technique A2.3.1-2 states:
Example: A Web-based authoring tool includes a progress bar, implemented
in JavaScript, that displays the time remaining in a conversion process.
Using ARIA, the component is given the name "ConversionStatus" and the
role "progressbar".
This example illustrates enablement using the underlying platform
accessibility architecture, namely ARIA together with the implementation
of ARIA and its mappping to lower-level accessibility architectures (e.g.
in the browser).
Hence, we might restate A2.3 something like:
Guideline A.2.3 [For the authoring tool user interface] Ensure that the
interface is enabled for alternative presentations. [
The key difference is that A1.2 is about implementation (what MSAA folks
might call the server-side) whereas A2.3 concerns enablement (what MSAA
folks might call client-side usage).
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@us.ibm.com
www.ibm.com/able
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org
04/14/2008 08:22 AM
To
w3c-wai-au@w3.org
cc
Subject
Fw: Looking at A.2.3
Forwarding this for everybody since this copy just went to Jan. I will be
sending the updated draft later this morning.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@us.ibm.com
www.ibm.com/able
----- Forwarded by Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM on 04/14/2008 08:22 AM
-----
Michael A
Squillace/Austin/
IBM To
Jan Richards
02/25/2008 09:03 <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
AM cc
Subject
Re: Looking at A.2.3(Document link:
Michael A Squillace)
Jan:
Unfortunately, my wife is having minor surgery today (which was pushed up
from the original date of Wed Feb 27) so I will not be on today's call.
However, I did look at the guidelines mentioned below and I do think they
are redundant. In fact, I think A.2.3 is a more thorough description of
what is required in A.1.2. THe latter simply focuses on th need for an
accessibility architecture as part of the platform upon which the
authoring
tool is built and an alternative for functionality that cannot be
supported
by that platform. A.2.3 lists specific requirements of that platform (eg.
use of name, role, states and properties, and event-monitoring system). To
me A.1.2 is an introductory remark or, perhaps, a first or minimal success
criteria for A.2.3 rather than a guideline in and of itself. Even
techniques are similar (eg consider the technique for alternative
presentation in A.1.2 for a graph and that for an altenrative
representation of a links list in A.2.3).
Hope this helps and sorry for the last-minute cancellation.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@us.ibm.com
www.ibm.com/able
Jan Richards
<jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
To
02/11/2008 03:49 PM Michael A
Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Subject
Looking at A.2.3
Hi Michael,
As you look at "Guideline A.2.3 [For the authoring tool user interface]
Ensure that the interface can be presented in different ways."
(
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2008/WD-ATAG20-TECHS-20080206/WD-ATAG20-TECHS-20080206.html#check-tool-sep-presentation
)
you may want to consider if we are unnecessarily overlapping with:
"Guideline A.1.2 [For the authoring tool user interface] Support
interoperability with assistive technologies."
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2008/WD-ATAG20-TECHS-20080206/WD-ATAG20-TECHS-20080206.html#check-tool-interoperability
If you want to discuss it, please give me a call.
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 Monday, 14 April 2008 15:20:54 UTC