W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2003

Demo for the Agenda

From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:10:10 +0200
To: "'Web Content Guidelines'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-id: <000e01c2ff8c$8d522370$d892003e@patirsrv.patir.com>

I just dawned on me the obvious (with some help from Wendy). It is not very
useful me telling everyone what RDF tools may or may not be coming. people
need to know what tools are there now.

So I have put up our in-house stuff on our testing server.

The syntax is invalid, and the meta data is embarrassing - but it works. It
works today and anyone can use it, and anyone can make  any content
accessible. If people tell me they want to use it -then it will stay on the
web (embarrassing though it is).

We made today  crude examples

case 1
original page:
It is missing the old alt tag

However it has in the header a reference to a RDF resource document
http://www.ubaccess.com/rdftest1.xml that makes it accessible for profile 1.

If you go to UB Access test server you can see SWAP take the resource , take
the RDF file and render an accessible page

Feel free to make your own page, RDF file and go to + the url of my document.... (where
"my document" is your inaccessible page with a link to an RDF document)
note: please mimic my rdf as much as possible - flexible ways of writing RDF
is not supported
note: in this case the inaccessible page should be XML (like xhtml)

That is the only case we managed to put up, but I want to put up two more
over the weekend - I want to show you the cases a bit so you get an idea
where it is going

Case 2 (will try and put it up by Monday)
This is an example where you can not add the header line into the
inaccessible page (maybe because you do not have access to the inaccessible
source pages)
What you can do is make a separate file that links the resource and the
resource document. see http://ubaccess.com/swaptestlinks.html
SWAP will  render the linked to resources accessible
It needs a separate pipeline - will try and put it up over the week.

note: in this case the inaccessible page can be in invalid markup (like
badly written html) only the file with the links needs to be in XML

I would like to get up another example
Look at file http://ubaccess.com/swaptest3.html
 as you can see the RDF is not yet  written but we will try and get this
pipeline up by Monday, but  if you ve got an idea of what is going to happen

note, the same word or RDF statement will work to translate the same word
more then once (Xpath/Xpointer)
So if we had a few generic "simplification" RDF files can simplified
multiple pages on multiple sites. You do not have to annotate repeated
content more then once.

Note again this is very crude. but anyone can use it -

All the best,

Lisa Seeman

UnBounded Access

Widen the World Web

lisa@ubaccess.com <mailto:lisa@ubaccess.com>
www.ubaccess.com <http://www.ubaccess.com/>
Tel: +972 (2) 675-1233
Fax: +972 (2) 675-1195

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Jason White
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 8:07 AM
To: Web Content Guidelines
Subject: Agenda

Thursday, 10 April, 2002, 20:00-21:30 UTC (4 PM US Eastern, 10 PM
France, 6 AM Eastern Australia) on +1-617-761-6200, passcode 9224.
IRC: irc.w3.org:6665, channel #wai-wcag


1. To complete the work of the subgroup at the face to face meeting
   that sought to reorganize the guidelines according to the proposed

2. To discuss the proposed definitions of the three categories/levels:

Other issues available for analysis:

The implications of the proposed levels for the further development of
the WCAG conformance scheme.

Whether a reorganization of the guidelines according to the proposed
categories would overcome substantial concerns affecting the
development of WCAG 2.0.

Whether the guidelines should be regarded as specifying what ought to
be delivered to the user agent, perhaps via intermediary processing,
rather than what the author must create.

How to ensure that the guidelines remain precise, while taking
account of changes in user agents and assistive technologies, wherever
the latter may reside on the network.

The upgrade path from WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0: how it is to be explained,
and whether relatively straightforward WCAG 2.0 conformance profiles
can be constructed that correspond approximately to the three WCAG 1.0
conformance levels.

The role to be played by the concept of a "user agent baseline" in the
WCAG conformance scheme - if the guidelines specify what the user
agent must receive, rather than what the author is required to
produce, then it would appear that the concept of a "user agent
baseline" should play an important part in defining how the guidelines
apply, notwithstanding changes in technology.

It is not expected that all, or even most of these issues will be
considered at the meeting; the purpose of this list is to indicate
some of the major questions that still remain open.
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 13:21:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:29 UTC