- From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:23:00 -0600
- To: Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
- CC: cooper@w3.org, public-pfwg-comments@w3.org
We use "WAI-ARIA" as the acronym to avoid trademark issues. The WAI-ARIA FAQ states: " WAI uses "WAI-ARIA" to refer to the documents in the Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite. In order to avoid confusion, we request that others also use "WAI-ARIA", instead of just "ARIA", in documentation. " - http://www.w3.org/WAI/aria/faq#justaria More info is available under "Terminology and usage of "WAI-ARIA"" at <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-aria-docs#notes>, which says: * Generally use "WAI-ARIA" as the abbreviation (instead of only ARIA) - Always use WAI-ARIA in headings and on first use - In a single document where is appears frequently, it can be abbreviated to ARIA in some places; for example, see the first paragraph under "The WAI-ARIA Documents" at www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria#is - It's fine to say just "ARIA" in casual conversation - (This terminology and usage guidance is motivated by avoiding trademark issues.) I'll add something to "Referencing WAI Guidelines and Technical Documents" <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/linking> for review... Let me know if you have comments or questions... Best, ~Shawn ----- Shawn Lawton Henry W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) e-mail: shawn@w3.org phone: +1.617.395.7664 about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/ Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com wrote: > On: > * <a>ARIA Overview</a> should be <a>WAI-ARIA Overview</a> > I'm unclear if /all/ instances of ARIA should be presented as > "WAI-ARIA". My personal preference is to do "WAI-ARIA" on first use in a > section and plain "ARIA" after that. I believe you're requesting that > all instances be the long form, but I'm not clear. It's actually easier > just to find-replace it all to long form than to decide when to do long > and when to do short, but I don't know if that's best for readability. > In my humble opinion WAI-ARIA should not appear in other places of the spec than the title. Generally speaking WAI-ARIA is a synthetic term and I don't know historical reason for sticking WAI to ARIA, we don't call WAI-WCAG or WAI-ATAG. If there is a valid reason to have WAI-ARIA as opposed to ARIA, let it be only in the title. > > Anna > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] > *On Behalf Of *ext Michael Cooper > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:43 PM > *To:* Shawn Henry > *Cc:* public-pfwg-comments@w3.org; EOWG (E-mail) > *Subject:* Re: WAI-ARIA comments from EOWG > > Thanks for these comments. Here is where we're at: > > Shawn Henry wrote: >> >> Dear PFWG, >> >> EOWG recently discussed the WAI-ARIA documents and have the >> following comments. (These comments were generated by a subset of >> the EOWG and may not reflect consensus throughout the group.) >> >> 1. All of the documents >> >> * Make clear up front: >> - what is in that specific document and who it is for >> - that there are related documents designed for other audiences, >> &/or that are companions or dependencies of that doc >> - they should first have read the introduction to WAI-ARIA and the >> related documents at http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria > I think you were reviewing the editor's draft, which doesn't have > the public Status of this Document section that, I believe, > addresses this. I also feel the introduction section of each > document covers this. Are there further edits we should make in > service of this? If so, please send specific wording suggestions. > > Public drafts: > > * http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-wai-aria-20090224/ > * http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-wai-aria-practices-20090224/ > * http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-wai-aria-implementation-20090224/ > >> >> * For consistency with other WAI specs, consider the following >> titles/h1s: >> - Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 [without >> ‘Version’] > I made this change. >> - WAI-ARIA Primer for Accessible Rich Internet Applications 1.0 >> - WAI-ARIA Best Practices for Accessible Rich Internet >> Applications 1.0 >> - WAI-ARIA User Agent Implementation Guide for Accessible Rich >> Internet Applications 1.0 >> - WAI-ARIA Roadmap for Accessible Rich Internet Applications 1.0 >> [or no 1.0 needed?] > I think this is super-awkward. This is kind of like saying "WAI-ARIA > Best Practices for WAI-ARIA". I also don't see that this change > would make it more consistent with other WAI specs. The other > editors agreed that we don't want to make these title changes. >> >> * For documents that are informative (rather than normative >> standards/specs), make that clear. > This is addressed in the status of this document (again, an editors > draft issue). >> >> * <a>ARIA Overview</a> should be <a>WAI-ARIA Overview</a> > I'm unclear if /all/ instances of ARIA should be presented as > "WAI-ARIA". My personal preference is to do "WAI-ARIA" on first use > in a section and plain "ARIA" after that. I believe you're > requesting that all instances be the long form, but I'm not clear. > It's actually easier just to find-replace it all to long form than > to decide when to do long and when to do short, but I don't know if > that's best for readability. >> >> * Explain jargon like "user agent" on first use. Link terms to >> their definitions in the glossary. Make sure acronyms are written >> out in first use. > I did a massive linking of terms, and wrapping <abbr> around > everything I could think of, which I hope addresses this request. I > actually think I may have overdone it, but it was with the > expectation that it's easier to pull back than to go through another > pass to add. I welcome feedback about the appropriate amount of term > links and <abbr> markup. >> >> * Consider using the CSS as is in /TR/WCAG/, especially for the >> links to the definitions > We will take a look at this with a goal to adopting some of the > styles from WCAG 2.0. >> >> * add [contents] link at the top, e.g., like /TR/WCAG/ > This is done. >> >> * include link to public comments list in the Status section (or >> wherever else appropriate) > Standard for public status; editorial draft issue again. >> >> 2. WAI-ARIA 1.0 Editor's Draft <http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/> >> >> * In "This section is informative" link "informative" to >> definition and un-italicize. > Done. I linked normative and informative to a glossary entry. I used > a "termref" class which is styled to look how older WCAG drafts did > it. The style for that class may be updated in addressing the above > CSS request. >> >> * Change "Semantics are knowledge of" to "Semantics is the >> knowledge of..." > Done >> >> 3. WAI-ARIA Best Practices >> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/ /> >> >> "Writing rich internet applications is much more difficult than >> righting in HTML. It is even more work to ensure your application >> runs in multiple browsers and support WAI-ARIA." >> is pretty strong. Please reconsider wording. This could be taken >> out of context and used to say that the main point is that ARIA is >> really hard, instead of how awesome it is to the user. > I'll happily take wording suggestions. I did nothing yet. >> >> Note that some EOWG participants were somewhat uncomfortable >> telling people so strongly to use toolkits. (more on this is in a >> separate email) > We have agreed that we will make this change, but I can't promise > when it will show up in a draft. >> >> (also typo "righting" and “support”) > done >> >> ### >> >> Regards, >> ~Shawn for EOWG <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/> >> >> >> ------------------ >> Shawn Lawton Henry >> W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) >> e-mail: shawn@w3.org >> phone: +1.617.395.7664 >> about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/ >> >> > > -- > > Michael Cooper > Web Accessibility Specialist > World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative > E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org> > Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/> >
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 20:23:11 UTC