Re: Indexing

----- Original Message -----
From: "William Loughborough" <love26@gorge.net>
> Using "word search" engines to locate anything, let alone collate stuff is
> a craft/art/skill/+ reserved not for those with training in computer
> science but in "data search" methods. So - are old folks to be denied
> access to this incredible resource because its parts are scattered
randomly
> throughout cyberspace? I hope not and am doing what little I can to use
the
> WAI "tail" to wag the W3C "dog" to force immediate
> recommendations/standards/guidelines/+ [...]

The metaphor I see here isn't about a dog and a tail, but more of a cart and
a horse.

There are no tools. There are no relevant final W3C Recommendations that I'm
aware of. Almost nobody is prepared technically or otherwise to index legacy
content, particularly non-technical web designers.

What about people who hand-code? I'm aware of one ADA Technical Assistance
Center that does so. They have megabytes of existing content. They can't
afford indexing tools to produce RDF or whatever format is specified (does
one even exist yet?), much less person-hours to retrofit the content they
already have out there in plain old HTML. They don't speak XML, and throwing
this requirement over to ATAG doesn't do any good, since the center's not
going to be using any of their products. And their web hosting is
outsourced, so any tool to do this kind of thing automatically on the server
might not be implemented. By making this a P1, this group that's chartered
to support others in making things accessible to PWDs can't even claim
single-A compliance!

I see the value of indexing, particularly as relates to cognitive
disabilities. But it is no less of an "art" than search. What's more, I can
think of some web content that would not stand up to an indexing effort, due
to the methods in which it's stored, gathered, presented, or referenced.
This, like the SVG issue, may be appropriate years from now, when the tools
to do it are in easy reach, but that time is not now, or even close at hand.
Nothing the W3C can do "immediately" will change that between now and the
time WCAG 2 becomes a Recommendation.

I can't think of this as higher than a P3. The level of effort involved to
do this on any large site, even if this proposed guideline were
spectacularly delineated for the designer, is enough to make most of those
who are interested in making their sites accessible turn away. I hate to
play pragmatist to this crowd, but an overly ambitious standard simply won't
gain traction. As these guidelines approach the more labor-intensive and
stringent, fewer organizations, corporations, governmental bodies, etc.,
will adopt them, fewer sites will be made accessible, and the end result is
that less content, not more, will be made truly accessible.

----
Matt May
Webvan Group

Received on Monday, 25 December 2000 15:50:00 UTC