Re: request for intergroup coordination

Jon Gunderson wrote:
> 
> Ian,
> A requirement in the UA guidelines (if any) would be a special case
> checkpoints of checkpoint 7.6.  Two potential checkpoints would deal with
> directly moving to the list of navigation links and/or skipping them.  For
> example:
> 
> "Provide one step access to the collection of links that have been
> identified by the author for navigation [Priority 3]"

The UA issues list includes a new issue 303 [1]. This issue will
involve a proposal to list explicitly for checkpoint 7.6 those
elements in HTML 4 we mean. This list would include MAP. Therefore,
I don't think a new checkpoint is necessary since the user can
get to the MAP as part of structured navigation. I don't know why
one-step navigation to a MAP is more important than one-step 
navigation to H1s.

[1] http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#303
 
> "Provide a one step to skip a collection of navigational links that have
> been identified by the author [Priority 3]"

This is also part of checkpoint 7.6 as is since you can simply move
to the next main element away from the MAP.

 - Ian
 
> The reference to MAP would be in the techniques document as the best way to
> indicate a collection of navigational links in HTML.  The UAAG techniques
> document could just reference the WCAG techniques on this issue.  Other
> markup languages would have other techniques.
> 
> Jon
> 
> At 03:47 PM 7/19/2000 -0400, Ian Jacobs wrote:
> >Jon Gunderson wrote:
> > >
> > > Response in JRG:
> > >
> > > >Discussion:
> > > >
> > > >The WCA and UA working groups met in joint session earlier and decided
> > "use
> > > >the MAP element, and not a reserved CLASS value, to group the 'groups of
> > > >related links' discussed in WCAG Checkpoint 13.6.
> > > >
> > > >There appears to be some divergence of opinion as to whether that meeting
> > > >identified special UA processing for these MAP elements as opposed to
> > other
> > > >major structural elements or not.  WCA and UA could clarify on this point.
> > >
> > > JRG: The UA group has not been as a group particularly interested in having
> > > a separate checkpoint(s) for access to markup that is used to indicate
> > > navigational links.  But that was before we have been working on the
> > > minimal requirements for each checkpoint.  It maybe of some interest in UA
> > > to discuss this again.  But I hesitate do to the current number of open
> > > issues the group is trying to resolve.
> >
> >I don't think we should have an explicit requirement for handling MAP.
> >I think that the HTML spec should include suggested user agent
> >capabilities
> >to handle this, rather than putting these requirements in the UA
> >Guidelines.
> >
> >  - Ian



-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Received on Wednesday, 19 July 2000 16:34:24 UTC