- From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:22:38 -0500
- To: WAI-AUWG List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
- CC: WAI CG <w3c-wai-cg@w3.org>
Hi all, (I am cc'ing WAI-CG because of interest expressed there re: coordinating this issue) I took this action on the Monday meeting... ACTION: JR clarify in the "accessibility supported" piece that the onus is on the installer/author Updated proposal: (original: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JanMar/0011.html) (1) If possible, let's stick with "conforms to WCAG 2.0" with the extra wording. (2) Add link in definition "Accessible web content is web content that conforms to a particular level of WCAG 2.0 (see *Relationship to WCAG 2.0* section). (3) Rewording "Relationship to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0" - trying to make it shorter and clearer: Because WCAG 2.0 is the most recent W3C Recommendation regarding web content accessibility, ATAG 2.0 frequently refers to WCAG 2.0 conformance in order to set requirements for (1) the accessibility of web-based authoring tool user interfaces (Part A) and (2) how authors should be enabled, supported, and guided towards producing accessible web content (Part B). Note on "accessibility-supported ways of using technologies": Part of conformance to WCAG 2.0 is the requirement that "only accessibility-supported ways of using technologies are relied upon to satisfy the [WCAG 2.0] success criteria. Any information or functionality that is provided in a way that is not accessibility supported is also available in a way that is accessibility supported." In broad terms, a technology is considered accessibility supported when (1) the way that the Web content technology is used is supported by users' assistive technology and (2) the Web content technology has accessibility-supported user agents that are available to users. This concept is not easily extended to authoring tools because many tools can be installed and used in a variety of environments with differing availabilities for assistive technologies and user agents (e.g., private intranets versus public websites, monolingual sites versus multilingual sites, etc.). Therefore: *For the purposes of ATAG 2.0 conformance, the accessibility-supported requirement is waived. However, once an authoring tool has been installed and put into use, it would be appropriate for the web content it produces (and the authoring tool user interface of web-based authoring tools) to be assessed for WCAG 2.0 conformance within its environment, including whether the accessibility-supported requirement is met.* Cheers, Jan -- (Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc. jan.richards@utoronto.ca | 416-946-7060 Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC) Faculty of Information | University of Toronto
Received on Thursday, 21 January 2010 19:24:03 UTC