- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 22:00:48 -0400
- To: Loretta Guarino Reid <lguarino@adobe.com>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 07:54 PM 2001-09-18 , Loretta Guarino Reid wrote: >Perhaps the border is getting fuzzy to me because scripting really changes the >nature of content. Are our guidelines starting to require scripting, at the >same time that we are wrestling with how to make it accessible? Or perhaps >these only become issues when someone is using scripting? > AG:: This is not so much an answer as some background. Interactive content, whether created by scripting or Applets or VRML, means that the content is entering a space of interactive behavior which it shares with the browser functions that apply to all content. So yes, they are getting more similar. The model either to separate them clearly or blend them effectively is not necessarily known or agreed at this time. People in the research community are working on this. For example in the Call for Papers of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing The 17th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing Track on: Virtual Reality, Digital Media, and Computer Games March 10 - 14, 2002, Madrid, Spain <http://www.nicve.salford.ac.uk/sac2002>http://www.nicve.salford.ac.uk/sac20 02 it says... Special Track on Virtual Reality, Digital Media, and Computer Games The distinctions between virtual reality, animation, and computer games are blurring, and there is growing convergence between their media; Internet, Television broadcasting, consoles, film, wireless devices, and Interactive TV. Research and development in these fields is making rapid progress, due to their inherent attraction for diverse areas such as education, e-commerce, entertainment and computer games, heritage, telecommunications, engineering, film and other media. Authors are invited to submit original papers on these converging fields. There have been discussions inside W3C which reflect a recognition that there is work to be done in this area in one way or another. These may result in charters for more work, but I would not stop considering what we need and need to do on that account. I also have some hope that the ACE-Grid group will make some contributions to this area. http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ace-grid/msg00026.html In the mean time, we may have a problem trying to figure out what to do if we work the Protocol and Format requirements, the User Agent, Author Tool, and Content Guidelines all separately from one another. In notes for today's WAI Coordination Group call, I wondered if the "recognition of structure in support of intrapage navigation" and "interactive behavior" issues each might deserve its own Working Group or Working-group-like unit of work. The point being to take a small enough topic so that all the techniques could be laid out on the table side by side to see which address a given problem most effectively, and where we need to support some redundancy in techniques to provide a migration path. The CG has not dealt with this item, it will take some time to mull it over.. Please think if there are issues are that are inextricably intertwined with User Agent behavior, or are otherwise intensely dependent on looking at User Agent and Author Tool methods at once, in order to evaluate candidate plans for formats and their use. Al >I was presenting UAAG and WCAG in a talk, and I realized that the borders are >getting very fuzzy to me. In particular, some of the WCAG guidelines feel like >they are really UAAG guidelines (which may just mean I don't understand the >implications of the guidelines for content). > >For instance, providing text search as a navigation technique seems like it is >a UA issue, not a content issue. We don't really expect the content to provide >the search function, do we? It does need to present text that is searchable. > >And can the guidelines addressing change in context (checkpoint 2.3 and 2.4) >be addressed by content, or can they only be addressed at the UA level? Does >the content let the user configure how long they have for a timed response? >Can the content handle input errors like misspellings? > >Perhaps the border is getting fuzzy to me because scripting really changes the >nature of content. Are our guidelines starting to require scripting, at the >same time that we are wrestling with how to make it accessible? Or perhaps >these only become issues when someone is using scripting? > > Loretta >
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2001 21:58:00 UTC