W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2013

RE: Survey for AUWG for 27 May (in place of meeting)

From: Richards, Jan <jrichards@ocadu.ca>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:26:13 +0000
To: AUWG <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0B1EB1C972BCB740B522ACBCD5F48DEB6BEAAF63@ocadmail-maildb.ocad.ca>
Hi all,

Thanks for the answers so far! Alex, in particular, made a few comments that I'd like to comment on:


Q: The need for positive reframing of the IF clause in select success criteria:

Alex: "Don't agree with charactering the wording as dangerous"

JR: You're right, I probably should have said something like "complicating" instead of "dangerous".


Q: A.3.2.1:

Alex suggests:  "The authoring tools does not include session time limits or the authoring tool can automatically save edits made before the session time limits."

JR: I agree with Alex's wording.


Q: A.3.3.1:

Alex suggests: For authoring tool that plays visual time-based content, one of the following is true:

a) The visual time-based content does not play automatically

b) The visual time-based content can be set to not play automatically

c) The visual time-based content can be paused

JR: I'd prefer not to have Pause OR auto-play, but I can see you are trying to remove the requirement for a setting, so how about (I've also removed "render" since it is implied by play)?:

A.3.3.1 Static View Option: If an editing-view can play visual time-based content, then playing is not necessarily automatic upon loading the content and playing can be paused. (Level A)


Q: B.2.1.1

Alex: Copy and paste error in the survey. It should be, "B.2.1.1 Accessible Content Possible (WCAG): The authoring tool does not place restrictions on the web content that authors can specify or those restrictions do not prevent WCAG 2.0 success criteria from being met. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)"

JR: This looks the same to me...maybe Jeanne fixed the survey?... Alex: Do you agree with the text you pasted in?


Q: B.2.3.2

Alex: When did we add "semi-automatically" in the SC text? What does that mean? Is that testable? I'm okay with the rest.

JR: It was always there and is a define term (http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2012/ED-IMPLEMENTING-ATAG20-20120924/#def-Semi-Automated-Checking) - though a link is MISSIING in the document - that basically means that a person's judgement is required. For example, showing a alt field in an image insertion dialog filled with "Image" would be a failing semi-automated repair. Not showing the field and simply putting "Image" into the markup would be a failing fully automated repair.








T 416 977 6000 x3957

F 416 977 9844

E jrichards@ocadu.ca

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Jeanne Spellman [mailto:jeanne@w3.org]

> Sent: May-23-13 12:13 PM

> To: AUWG

> Subject: Survey for AUWG for 27 May (in place of meeting)


> Survey that replaces the meeting of 27 May.  Please answer the survey

> before Monday (US holiday) so that we do not fall behind our timeline.

> There are 9 questions.


> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20130523/


> New survey on rewording "If clause" success criteria to make it easier to find

> implementations. The "if" clauses are making it difficult to identify tools that

> match an undesirable behavior.  These changes should not change the

> meaning or intent of the success criteria, just make it easier identify tools

> with desirable behavior.
Received on Friday, 24 May 2013 16:26:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:28:46 UTC