- From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 13:02:26 +1000
- To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
So that I don't consume time at tomorrow's meeting expounding my opinion, here are some suggestions: I agree with Wendy that the solution to the problem Jon raised is to implement checkpoint 1.3 correctly. Also, there is a broader question of what should be served to a user agent. For example, one ought not to send raster images to a user agent that indicates a preference (via CC/PP or other methods) for vector graphics; similarly one should not send "final-form" presentations to a user agent that performs styling client-side. I think the scenario under discussion in this thread is an instance of the broader principle that the content, as delivered to the user agent, should match not only the user's needs and preferences, but also the user agent's ability to carry out adaptations and transformations, which can range from font scaling (Jon's example) through to sophisticated interface or document transformations. Emacspeak, for example, as used with the Emacs/W3 browser, has a range of supplied XSLT style sheets which, depending on a user-configurable option, can be applied to the content before it is rendered. Accordingly I have two alternative suggestions: 1. to make any necessary adjustments to ensure that font scaling is encompassed under checkpoints 1.3 or 1.4. 2. to clarify the importance of accommodating the user agent's ability to adapt and transform content (actually this doesn't simply apply to the user agent; a proxy somewhere could also carry out the adaptations). Font scaling would then be one example of the underlying principle. I do not think there should be a new checkpoint just to cover font scaling. Rather, our guidelines seek to enunciate principles and to build success criteria upon them; this level of generality in the checkpoints, and (technology-neutral) specificity in the success criteria, should constitute the background against which issues raised at a technology-specific level, of which this is an example, are raised. Concretely, we abstract and look for the underlying tenets of accessible design.
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2002 23:02:37 UTC