- From: john_slatin <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu>
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 13:22:16 -0500
- To: "'w3c-wai-gl@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <6AC4E20EED49D411941400D0B77E52F00693A5C7@forum.cc.utexas.edu>
I ran out of time this morning, but here are a few notes and suggestions re: the latest Working Draft. See you all in a couple of hours. John ==Slatin's notes begin here== Current wording The WCAG Working Group is proceeding carefully to minimize substantial differences between the WCAG 1.0 Recommendation and the WCAG 2.0 Working Draft. Refer to the Checkpoint Mapping Between WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 Working Draft for more detail on current correspondences. [js: If the goal is to "minimize substantial differences" between 1.0 and 2.0 there's no reason to spend time creating 2.0. I would propose something like the following language: The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group is working carefully to enable organizations and individuals that have adopted WCAG 1.0 in the past to make a smooth transition to WCAG 2.0. To facilitate this transition, please refer to the Checkpoint Mapping Between WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 Working Draft for more detail on current correspondences.] Design Principle Current wording The overall goal is to create Web content that is Perceivable, Operable, Navigable, and Understandable by the broadest possible range of users and compatible with their wide range of assistive technologies, now and in the future. [js: Suggest a re-wording to avoid passive voice, as follows: The primary goal is to create Web content that the widest possible range of persons can perceive, operate, navigate, and understand using the widest possible range of current and future technologies.] Current wording Perceivable. Ensure that all content can be presented in form(s) that can be perceived by any user - except those aspects of the content that cannot be expressed in words. [js: The more I read and think about this, the more uncomfortable I get. What are the "aspects that cannot be expressed in words"? I assume that the intent of this exception is to exclude such things as musical notes, the brushstrokes in a painting? In other words, that we don't want to seem to be demanding that Web developers find some way to allow people who are Deaf to have a direct perception of audio content, or enable people who are blind to have direct visual perception of images, fonts, etc. If this is correct, I think we should somehow make it explicit. But we should be mindful that we're asking Web developers to make some very subtle philosophical and aesthetic distinctions, identifying what's irreducibly non-verbal. Do we really want to do that? Would it change the intent of this provision to rephrase it as follows: " "Perceptible. Ensure that any Web content that can be expressed in words (language?) can be perceived by any user, either directly or with the aid of assistive technology. Provide equivalent alternatives for content that cannot be perceived by all users, either directly or with the aid of assistive technology."? I am not convinced that we really need the wording about content that "cannot be expressed in words" if we make it clear that making non-verbal content available via assistive technologies satisfies this guideline. I worry that the presence of the phrase about content that cannot be expressed in words will create a huge obstacle/firestorm that could threaten adoption of WCAG 2.0] Current wording: Orientation/Navigation. Facilitate content orientation and navigation [js: How about something like this: "Orientation and navigation. Provide contextual information and interface elements to facilitate orientation to and navigation through Web content, and ensure that these mechanisms can be perceived and used by any user, either directly or with the aid of assistive technology."?] Current wording: Comprehendible. [js: Change to: Comprehensible. Rationale: "Comprehendible" isn't good English.] Current wording: Technology robust [js: Change to: Robust technology.] == This installment ends here== John Slatin, Ph.D. Director, Institute for Technology & Learning University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C, Mail code G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu <mailto:jslatin@mail.utexas.edu> web http://www.ital.utexas.edu <http://www.ital.utexas.edu/>
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 14:22:30 UTC