Re: Comments on EOWG: Mobile-Accessibility Overlap document publication

Alan,

Thanks for the quick implementation. I am fine with leaving these two issues as is for this publication and addressing them later...

~Shawn

Alan Chuter wrote:
> 
> Thanks for all these suggestions. I've implemented most of them in a new 
> version [1]. I think that the following two merit some input from BPWG.
> 
> Shawn Henry wrote:
> 
>> location: throughout
>> current wording: WCAG 2.0 and MWBP 1.0 Together page
>> suggested revision: I understood that EOWG decided at the 20 June 
>> teleconference to take this page out for now. In order to keep the 
>> scope down and get the first version of the document completed sooner, 
>> EOWG suggested doing the Together page in a second revision. They 
>> suggested putting a placeholder paragraph in the overview document 
>> that says we might provide detailed information later, and for now if 
>> you are looking at both WCAG 2.0 & MWBP fresh, it’s probably best to 
>> start with WCAG 2.0 first and then use the "from WCAG 2.0 to MWBP 1.0" 
>> page, and also to point to the experiences document 
>> [http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/experiences] that shows some of the 
>> overlaps. [recorded in 
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/06/20-eo-minutes.html#action12]
>> rationale: simplifies the nav and lists/table of subpages, and avoids 
>> sending them to a page that is essentially empty of content.
> 
> Removing the page isn't the same as putting in "placeholder" text. I 
> don't think we can publish the draft with what is perhaps the most 
> important page missing. The action recorded was "put a placeholder 
> document for the WCAG 2.0 & MWBP 1.0 together document that suggests 
> looking at WCAG 2.0 first and then the "from WCAG 2.0 to MWBP 1.0" 
> document, and point to experiences document 
> [http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/experiences] that show some of the 
> overlaps". I've included a "provide detailed information later" 
> paragraph as you suggest and the pointer to the experiences page. I 
> think that really, as the page in its present shape is what you are 
> suggesting, but it's in a seperate page, not in the overview. In short, 
> I've left the page there but included the information suggested.
> 
>  > location: overview page, “Managing Overlapping Requirements” section
>  > current wording: whole section
>  > suggested revision: move this to http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/
>  > rationale: agreed to by EOWG: “ACTION: Alan: move the business case type
>  > information to the other document (EO introduction) and here leave only
>  > the technical information” -
>  > http://www.w3.org/2008/06/20-eo-minutes.html#action15
> Do you mean remove this section altogether? Perhaps this change can be 
> held over until after comment from BPWG.
> 
> best regards,
> 
> Alan
> 
> [1] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080702/ 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> -----
>> *I suggest the following for this publication, but they are not 
>> required:*
>>
>> location: overview page, “How to Use This Document” section
>> current wording: “This technical report consists of a number of pages 
>> describing the relationship between WCAG and MWBP. If you are 
>> interested in complying with both WCAG 2.0 and MWBP 1.0 together, then 
>> refer to WCAG 2.0 and MWBP 1.0 Together. If you have already complied 
>> with one of these recommendations, then depending on which one, 
>> continue with the following documents (@@note list and table provided 
>> in parallel until WGs decide which is easiest to understand):”
>> suggested revision: “This technical report includes 4 subpages that 
>> describe the relationship between each version of WCAG and MWBP 1.0. 
>> Each page covers a different scenario based on which document you are 
>> starting from, as listed [in the table] below.
>> <br><span class=”@@”>REVIEW NOTE: Do you find the bulleted list or the 
>> table easier to understand?</span>”
>> rationale: simpler explanation of the document, clearer indication of 
>> the open issue
>>
>> location: overview page, “Managing Overlapping Requirements” section
>> current wording: whole section
>> suggested revision: move this to http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile/
>> rationale: agreed to by EOWG: “ACTION: Alan: move the business case 
>> type information to the other document (EO introduction) and here 
>> leave only the technical information” - 
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/06/20-eo-minutes.html#action15
>>
>> location: overview page, Differences Between WCAG and MWBP section
>> current wording: “Differences Between WCAG and MWBP
>> Unlike the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, the Mobile Web Best 
>> Practices are not prioritised or assigned levels. MWBP relates to 
>> checkpoints of all the WCAG 1.0 priorities (1, 2 and 3) and to all the 
>> WCAG 2.0 level A, AA and AAA success criteria.”
>> suggested revision: “Priorities and Levels
>> The WCAG 1.0 checkpoints (CP) are assigned Priority 1, 2, 3. WCAG 2.0 
>> success criteria (SC) are assigned Level A, AA, AAA. The Mobile Web 
>> Best Practices (BP) are not assigned levels.”
>> (and change WCAG 1.0 link from 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-19990505/#priorities to 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#priorities)
>> rationale: clearer
>>
>> location: overview, appendix A: References
>> current wording: [WCAG2.0]
>> Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, B. Caldwell, M. Cooper, L. 
>> Guarino Reid and G. Vanderheiden, May 2007 (see 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/)
>> suggested revision: update to current version consider not putting a 
>> date and using the link http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20 so that it always 
>> goes to the current version
>> location: subpages
>> current wording: “Note on inconsistent links: Links in the “something” 
>> and “nothing” sections point to within this page. Links in the 
>> “everything” section point to the Recommendation.”
>> suggested revision: add <span class=”@@”>REVIEW NOTE: Is this too 
>> confusing? Suggestions for better ways to do it?</span>”
>>
>> location: all subpages
>> current wording:
>> “Nothing: content already complies with these BPs:”
>> “Something: more effort of some kind or a check, to comply with these 
>> BPs:”
>> “Everything: start from scratch to comply with these BPs:”
>> suggested revision:
>> “Nothing: content that already meets WCAG 1.0 should already meet 
>> these BPs:”
>> “Something: more effort of some kind or a check is need, to comply 
>> with these BPs:”
>> “Everything: these BPs are not related to WCAG 1.0 checkpoints:”
>> rationale: clearer
>>
>> -------
>> *Please consider these for the next version (or the easy and 
>> non-controversial ones for this version):*
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: Overview, Scope section
>> current wording: “This technical report is created as a supporting 
>> document to WCAG and MWBP, and does not replace either of those. For 
>> further and comprehensive information about how to make Web content 
>> accessible to people with disabilities, please refer to the Web 
>> Content Accessibility Guidelines. Similarly, for further and 
>> comprehensive information about best Practices for delivering Web 
>> content to mobile devices, please refer to the Mobile Web Best 
>> Practices.”
>> suggested revision: “This technical report is a companion document to 
>> WCAG and MWBP, and does not replace either of those. The actual Web 
>> Content Accessibility Guidelines document should be used to make Web 
>> content accessible to people with disabilities, and the Mobile Web 
>> Best Practices document should be used for best practices for making 
>> Web content for mobile devices.”
>> rationale: more direct
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: overview page, “How to Use This Document” section
>> current wording: table formatting, column headers are centered
>> suggested revision: left align column headers
>> rationale: easier to read since data is left aligned
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: overview, “Why No Mapping Table?” section
>> current wording: “While there appears to be many similarities between 
>> many of the WCAG provisions and those of the MWBPs, there are still 
>> many subtle differences. … but not the inverse.”
>> suggested revision: “While there are many similarities between the 
>> WCAG provisions and the MWBP provisions, there are still many subtle 
>> differences. … but not the inverse. Thus, there is not a simple 
>> mapping table between WCAG and MWBP. The <a href>Experiences Shared by 
>> People with Disabilities and by People Using Mobile Devices</a> 
>> document shows generally how WCAG and MWBP relate. ”
>> rationale: simpler. points to closet thing we have (experiences doc)
>>
>> priority: required for next version
>> location: overview doc, Appendix B: Glossary
>> suggested revision: move this back to the main part of the document 
>> (instead of an appendix) and edit to be more relevant across all 
>> subpages, and to have consistent wording., e.g: consider putting 
>> “Concerning the effort required to meet a checkpoint or best 
>> practice,” at the top rather than starting some of the definitions 
>> with is; where you have “checkpoint or best practice” add SC: “ 
>> checkpoint, success criteria, or best practice”…
>> priority: low, editor's discretion
>> location: overview page, “How to Use This Document” section
>> current wording: “considering progressing to”
>> suggested revision: “want to learn about”
>> rationale: more broad
>>
>> priority: low, editor's discretion
>> location: overview page, abstract
>> current wording: “This technical report describes the relationships, 
>> overlaps and differences between... Introductory information can be 
>> found in Web Content Accessibility and Mobile Web…”
>> suggested revision: “This technical report describes the overlaps and 
>> differences between… An introduced and links to related documents are 
>> in Web Content Accessibility and Mobile Web…”
>> rationale: more simple, direct wording
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: subpages
>> suggested revision: make the intro text the same
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: subpages
>> current wording: “If your content already meets Web Content 
>> Accessibility Guidelines 1.0, this page describes what needs to be 
>> done to meet all the Mobile Web Best Practices (MWBP).”
>> suggested revision: “For those familiar with <a href>Web Content 
>> Accessibility Guidelines 1.0</a>, this page describes what also needs 
>> to be done to meet <a href>Mobile Web Best Practices (MWBP) 1.0</a>.”
>> rationale: the audience is broader than those whose content already 
>> meets WCAG
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: subpages
>> current wording: “simplicity with keywords (nothing, something, 
>> everything)”
>> suggested revision: link to the “definitions” in the overview page
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: subpages
>> suggested revision: re-consider the order that the information is 
>> presented, e.g., alphabetical or as it is in the MWBP, etc. If not 
>> alphabetical or numerical, note in the document how it is ordered.
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: subpages
>> current wording: “This section deals with each of the best practices 
>> which WCAG 1.0 helps with meeting.”
>> suggested revision: “This section lists each of the Mobile Web best 
>> practices that related to WCAG 1.0, which are listed under “Nothing” 
>> and “”Something” above.
>>
>> priority: requested for next version
>> location: subpages
>> current wording: “As described in this section, many Mobile Web BPs 
>> have the added benefit of partial or complete compliance with certain 
>> WCAG success criteria. However, the accessibility guidelines are often 
>> more detailed or describe a different aspect of the same concept. It 
>> should not be assumed that following any BP will ensure accessibility. 
>> To ensure accessibility it is important to always consult the Web 
>> Content Accessibility Guidelines.”
>> suggested revision: consider having this idea only in the overview 
>> document and not repeating it on  every subpage.
>>
>> ###
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Shawn Lawton Henry, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/
phone: +1-617-395-7664
e-mail: shawn@w3.org

Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:14:52 UTC