RE: Attempt to simplify and harmonize "content display" vs. "chrome" distinction in ATAG2 and UAAG2

Agreed, this is much better.

From: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael A Squillace
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 2:18 PM
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Subject: Re: Attempt to simplify and harmonize "content display" vs. "chrome" distinction in ATAG2 and UAAG2


+1 - much clearer, Jan.

--> 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>
Sent by: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org

07/07/2008 04:04 PM

To

WAI-AUWG List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>, WAI-UA list <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>

cc

Subject

Attempt to simplify and harmonize "content display" vs. "chrome"  distinction in ATAG2 and UAAG2








Hi all,

Both ATAG2 and UAAG2 often require specific terms to distinguish the
part of the user interface that reflects the content being
editing/viewed and the part that is the software's own. For some time
we've tried using the terms "content display" and "chrome", but "chrome"
is especially off-putting for people. Also the fact the "chrome" covers
help documentation, which might be HTML pages is also confusing.

So here's another terminological try (note: [/] denotes AU/UA versions)...

[AUTHORING TOOL/USER AGENT] USER INTERFACE
The display and control mechanism that [authors/people] use to
communicate with and operate the [authoring tool/user agent] software. A
user interface may be non-Web-based or Web-based or a combination (e.g.,
a non-Web-based [authoring tool/browser] might have on-line help pages).
For the purposes of these guidelines, there is an important distinction
between (1) *CONTENT VIEW(S)* the accessibility of which often depends
to some extent on the content being [edited/rendered, played or
executed] and (2) the rest of the [authoring tool/user agent] user
interface (referred to as the *USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT VIEWS*)
the accessibility of which does not depend on the content being
[edited/rendered].

CONTENT VIEW
The [authoring tool/user agent] user interface functionality that
presents content for user interaction. Content views may be
distinguished by:

(1) *Editability*: some content views allow authors to modify the
content as displayed (e.g., [an "editing view"/an editable "source
view"]), while others do not (e.g., [a "preview" feature/the rendered
view typical of browsers, a read-only "source view"]).

(2) *Nature of rendering*:

(a) *instruction level content views* present the content
encoding instructions in non-rendered form (e.g., [plain text editing
views, form-based editing views that provide direct access to the
instructions such as selecting attribute values/"source view"]).

(b) *rendered content views* result from fully or partially rendering,
playing, or executing the content. The broad range of potential
renderings covers conventional (often called "WYSIWYG") renderings to
less conventional renderings such as a graphical wavefront of an audio
file or the displays of text-only browsers. *Partial renderings* are
those in which some aspects of the content are rendered, played, or
executed, but not others (e.g., a frame-by-frame video [editor/player]
rendering the graphical aspect, but not the temporal aspect, of a video.

(c) *meta content views* present properties, metadata or other more
abstract information about the content (e.g., [a content management
system that creates a Web-based calendar based on the author selecting
only the month and year/a "page properties" feature]).

USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT VIEWS
All parts of the user interface other than the content view(s). Includes
all user interface components that surround, underlie, or superimpose
upon content views (e.g., text areas, menus bars, rulers, pop-up context
menus) and also other Web content made available to the author/user by
the developer of the [authoring tool/user agent] (e.g. help files).



Any thoughts on "CONTENT VIEW" and "USER INTERFACE EXCLUDING CONTENT
VIEWS" as a way forward?


Cheers,
Jan