Re: w3c mailing list problems

I just asked our systeam to work on it...


> aloha, y'all!
> 
> Len asked,
> 
> quote:
> Gregory,
> Would you elaborate on the problems you found with the w3c mail list 
> archives (a system called Hypermess,  described at 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/AboutArchives.html )
> unquote
> 
> below is a copy of a post i sent to the WAI-IG list at the beginning of 
> this year -- it is archived at:
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2000JanMar/0038.html>
> from which trails a thread which ER list members may find 
> interesting/germane...
> 
> i volunteered to work with the W3C systems team to rectify the problems 
> outlined below (and even included a few immediate/quick fixes), but nothing 
> has yet come of the attempt to make the W3C mail archives (not to mention 
> the Webmaster FAQ) more accessible, due, in no small part, to the usual 
> logistical problems--too many problems, too few people to work on 
> them--although i wasn't the only one (as al and charles can attest) who 
> volunteered to work on developing and implementing a solution...
> 
> i still believe it imperative that some concrete action taken on the issue 
> of the main interface to the W3C mail archives, as the mail archive entry 
> points not only fail to implement--to the fullest extent possible--the Web 
> Content Accessibility Guidelines, but are, in my opinion, an embarrassment 
> to the W3C as a whole...
> 
> gregory
> 
> --- FORWARDED MESSAGE ---
> Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 11:24:15 -0500
> To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
> From: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <unagi69@concentric.net>
> Cc: WAI Education & Outreach Working Group <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>,
>          WAI Interest Group Emailing List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, webmaster@w3.org
> Subject: new mail archives format (was Re: EOWG Agenda, Jan 7, 2000)
> 
> aloha, judy!
> 
> in the agenda announcement for the 7 january 2000 EO telecon, you wrote:
> 
> quote
> Remember you can always check the EOWG archives, at
>          <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/>;
> try out the new archive format.
> unquote
> 
> to which i reply that i really dislike the new format, as it makes it
> impossible for anyone using speech output alone to navigate the archive via
> a list of links, as there is no means of differentiating between the
> boilerplate hyperlink text for "date", "thread", "author", and "subject"...
>   there are currently nine hyperlinks with the hyperlink text "date", nine
> with the hyperlink text "thread", nine with the hyperlink text "author",
> and nine with the hyperlink text "subject" listed in a list of links for
> the EO mail archive -- how am i to differentiate between them?
> 
> i vastly preferred the old introductory format, where i could make sense of
> the archive divisions, such as:
> 
> Since January 2000
> October to December 1999
> July to September 1999
> 
> when navigating via a list of links, and _then_ choose to have the messages
> listed by date, thread, author, or subject...
> 
> would it be possible to have both interfaces available?  would it also be
> possible to add semantic information to the boilerplate hyperlink text via
> the use of the TITLE attribute, so that rather than being encoded as:
> 
> <a href="1999OctDec/">date</a>
> <a href="1999OctDec/thread.html">thread</a>
> <a href="1999OctDec/author.html">author</a>
> <a href="1999OctDec/subject.html">subject</a>
> 
> the link would be encoded thus:
> 
> <a href="1999OctDec/"
>          title="Messages from October to December 1999 sorted by date"
>          >date</a>
> <a href="1999OctDec/thread.html"
>          title="Messages from October to December 1999 sorted by thread"
>          >thread</a>
> <a href="1999OctDec/author.html"
>          title="Messages from October to December 1999 sorted by author"
>          >author</a>
> <a href="1999OctDec/subject.html"
>          title="Messages from October to December 1999 sorted by subject"
>          >subject</a>
> 
> implementation of the latter suggestion would (to a certain extent) reduce
> the need for offering an alternative view -- read: providing the option to
> view the archive using the old interface -- provided, of course, that one's
> UA and/or AT is capable of exposing to the user titles that have been
> defined for hyperlinks, either through a list of links or -- ideally, and
> -- by serial navigation (i.e. tabbing from link to link)...
> 
> in any event, this touches on one of my personal crusades -- the attempt to
> get page authors to use semantically sensible -- and, wherever possible,
> unique -- hyperlink text for every hyperlink on a page...  by semantically
> sensible, i mean hyperlink text which does NOT rely on surrounding
> contextual information ...
> 
> additionally, i'm troubled by the fact that, by violating WCAG Checkpoint
> 13.1, which states,
> 
> quote
> 13.1 Clearly identify the target of each link. [Priority 2]
> Link text should be meaningful enough to make sense when read out of
> context -- either on its own or as part of a sequence of links. Link text
> should also be terse. For example, in HTML, write "Information about
> version 4.3" instead of "click here". In addition to clear link text,
> content developers may further clarify the target of a link with an
> informative link title (e.g., in HTML, the "title" attribute).
> unquote
> 
> the new archive format could only obtain a Single-A conformance rating, and
> i think it behooves W3C space to be (at least) Double-A compliant...
> 
> which, brings me to the Webmaster FAQ, located at:
>          <http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/FAQ.pl>
> 
> this page is an accessibility nightmare, for when it is navigated via the
> keyboard using speech (JFW 3.5, to be precise), all that is echoed is:
> 
> "W3C Homepage visited link"
> "FAQ link"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> "Display button"
> 
> (note: only the first 2 items listed above appear in a list of links for
> the page)
> 
> since the forms that drive the FAQ page are embedded within a TABLE, one
> cannot even obtain surrounding contextual information by using the "speak
> entire line" screen-review command...  moving the display button cell from
> the first item in the row to the last helps somewhat -- at least, when
> using JFW 3.5 -- making it possible to use the "speak from left margin to
> cursor" screen-review command to obtain the contextual information to
> associate with the button, but that is far from an obvious solution for
> anyone who is simply trying to use the page to report a problem...
> 
> all that being said, i DO like the addition of the search form to the mail
> archive!
> 
> gregory.

Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2000 02:27:20 UTC