Re: Vs: Baseline capabilities

in response to claus' post, chaals wrote:

quote
There seem to be two possible approaches. One is that we require 
demonstration that the products can be localised. Another approach would be 
to phrase the question "is technology X available in language Y".
unquote

actually, it depends upon the type of platform the program is built 
upon--proprietary (and, hence, closed) or open source...

if the program is not open source, then it isn't sufficient to merely 
demonstrate that it is possible that a product can be localized--it must be 
explicitly stated that technology X is supported only in UA version Y for 
language Z...  with a closed development system, the second approach is not 
only the superior, but the only rational,  approach...  as anyone who uses 
(or is highly familiar with the use and capabilities, as well as 
limitations, of) adaptive technology and who has been to a major adaptive 
technology conference, such as CSUN, can attest, there is often a world of 
difference between a demonstration of the possible and the reality of the 
readily available, not to mention the immediately usable, as when a feature 
of an AT depends on the individual user obtaining a poorly documented and 
not-all-that-readily-available, nor particularly well or accessibly 
documented, third party application/plugin/virtual machine in order for 
that feature of the AT to work...

it's not unlike the problem you're currently facing when you use the UA 
with an english interface, but non-english documentation, as well as the 
basis of my belief that documentation be held to the highest standards 
regarding accessibility (as well as usability and interoperability, but 
that's another matter)...  good thing you've got the gestalt view in your 
native tongue, and that the icons are derived from a similar cultural 
milieu, otherwise you'd really be up a creek, unless you've kept up with 
your old and west saxon more conscientiously than i--but, then, come to 
think of it, knowing you, you probably have...

gregory

PS: for what it's worth, i think that the debate should center around the 
points raised by lisa [1] and matt [2], whose analysis of baseline 
capabilities i find highly realistic and resonant even in quote developed 
unquote countries...  personally, i'd err on the side of caution and word 
the DOS support statement more stringently, or else (he said, tongue only 
partially in cheek) we'll have to replace the "until user agent..." clauses 
with "until the ER WG or someone else builds a prototype proxy to make this 
type of information available..." clauses...

References:
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2000OctDec/0167.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2000OctDec/0175.html

At 05:15 AM 10/18/00 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>Claus,
>
>good points.
>
>There seem to be two possible approaches. One is that we require
>demonstration that the products can be localised. Another approach would be
>to phrase the question "is technology X available in language Y".
>
>The first approach places a higher burden on the speakers of a particular
>language to actually ensure that a product is localised, but that may be
>beyond their control even when it is possible for it to be localised. For
>example, I believe that most Microsoft products can be localised, but because
>they don't release the source code and do it in houose, there is nothing
>available until they have localised it.
>
>The second approach means that we can be a bit surer that people have access
>to the software in the relevant language, but requires more tracking since
>everything becomes seperated by language, and may bring up issues of
>localisation effectiveness - I use a german web browser that has an english
>language interface, but unfortunately there is no english language help
>documentation yet.
>
>What do people think?
>
>Does anyone have any thoughts on which is the better approach?
>
>cheers
>
>Charles
>
>On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Claus Thøgersen wrote:
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Claus Thøgersen <thoeg@get2net.dk>
>   To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
>   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 2:18 AM
>   Subject: Sv: Baseline capabilities
>
>   A technology is considered to be sufficiently implemented when it is
>   implemented in at least two free products available that meet the following
>   conditions:
>
>   1. There must betwo such products available for each of
>
>       - Windows 95
>       - Windows 2000
>       - MacOS 8+
>       - Unix (must include linux)
>
>   2. They must be known to be usable with at least two speech output systems,
>   including one free one where that is available.
>
>   Proposed addition
>   B: Both systems must be shown to be designed so they can be localized 
> into different languages.
>
>   3. They must work with standard keyboard modifications (including modified
>   keyboards) and one voice input system.
>
>   4. The products must have been available for at least 6 months.
>
>   Here again there are special cases with regards to localization. Does 
> the 6 months have to be drawn from the first often US release of a 
> technology or a product or from the release date of the first localized 
> version of that product??
>
>   Regards
>   Claus Thøgersen
>
>--
>Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
>Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
>September - November 2000:
>W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, 
>France

   -------------------------------------------------------------------
   BOUNDARY, n.  In political geography, an imaginary line between two
   nations, separating the imaginary rights of one from the imaginary
   rights of the other.       Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
   -------------------------------------------------------------------
                Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
   Camera Obscura:            http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html
   VICUG NYC:           http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/vicug/index.html
   Read 'Em & Speak:    http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/books/index.html
   -------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Thursday, 19 October 2000 22:47:32 UTC