- From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:23:50 -0400
- To: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
If we decide to move "Definition of authoring tool" to the Conformance section I think we should add a new note to the three that already exist in the first part of the introduction, saying something like: For information on what types of applications qualify as "authoring tools", see the *"Definition of authoring tool"*. @@with *Definition of authoring tool* linking down to the new location of that text@@ Cheers, Jan Jan Richards wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Would it help if we moved the two normative sections of the Introduction > down into the Conformance section which is already Normative?: > > - Definition of authoring tool > - Relationship to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 > > Cheers, > Jan > > > > > Boland Jr., Frederick E. wrote: >> In response to my action item, I reviewed references [1], [2], and >> [3], and didn’t notice anything specifically referring to mixing >> “normative” and “informative” within a “section”, other than Good >> Practice 2 in [3] and Requirement 7 in [4]. >> >> >> Good Practice 2 has as a technique: >> >> >> >> *“Techniques* >> >> 1. For each section in the specification: >> * Determine if the content is normative or informative and >> explicitly label it as either “normative” or “informative.” >> >> “ >> >> I’m not sure if the “Introduction” of the latest ATAG draft >> specifically meets this good practice. I thought the “Introduction” >> part itself was a “section”. Then how can each of the parts within >> the “Introduction” be “sections”? Are they “subsections” of >> “Introduction” section? If so, then maybe they can be labeled as >> “subsections”, with an explanatory sentence right after “Introduction” >> heading saying something like “The Introduction section is composed of >> the following subsections: .., which may have differing normativity >> designations ” or something like that? Or at least label each of the >> parts of “Introduction” as “subsections”? Or maybe move “Definition >> of Authoring Tool” to “section” level”? >> >> The purpose is to avoid confusion to the reader by repeated use of >> “This section” within a “section”? >> >> >> >> Requirement 7 says: >> >> >> >> “Use a consistent style for conformance requirements and explain how >> to distinguish them.” >> >> >> >> Do the “subsections?” of ATAG “Introduction” “section” have different >> “styles” to meet this requirement? >> >> Does ATAG as a whole use different styles to distinguish “normative” >> from “informative” content? >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks and best wishes >> >> Tim Boland NIST >> >> >> >> PS – It may be useful to evaluate ATAG against References [1] and [2] >> in general.. >> >> >> >> >> >> [1]: W3C Manual of Style: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/ >> >> >> >> [2]: W3C PubRules: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules >> >> >> >> [3]: W3C QA Framework Specification Guidelines Good Practice 2: >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#norm-informative-gp >> >> >> >> [4]: W3C QA Framework Specification Guidelines Requirement 7: >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#consistent-style-principle >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- Jan Richards, M.Sc. User Interface Design Lead Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC) Faculty of Information 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, 29 June 2009 13:24:28 UTC