- From: Lee Roberts <leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 08:05:31 -0800
- To: "WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <000001c2ddb0$ea32de20$5f814094@rose>
Comment 1: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002OctDec/0135.html> WWAAC (via David Poulson and Colette Nicolle) <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002OctDec/0135.html> , 4 Nov 2002 Comments on reviewer's note (about accessibility of protocols). <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wcag20-issues.html#47> This issue was recently closed. The note should be removed. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002OctDec/0111.html> Sun (via Earl Johnson), 27 Oct 2002 Sun thinks the mention of protocols is relevant and desireable (especially when a link also points to an appendix entry that names protocols that support accessibility). Content providers/developers ought to be helped by pointing to where they can find more specific information for ensuring that when they use non-W3C technologies in web content they are using or choose technologies that have access support built into them (e.g. Java/Swing, PDF, realtime video, etc.). <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002OctDec/0117.html> IBM (via Andi Snow-Weaver), 29 Oct 2002 * Minimum success criteria * items #2 and #3 are not needed here. Checkpoint 5.4 covers programmatic interfaces. * what does it mean in item 3 to use accessibility features if available? If accessibility features are not available, can I use the technology or not? * in answer to the question asking if protocols are relavant to this checkpoint, yes "protocols" are relevant and should be included. * In Example 2, "Java program" should be "Java applet" Comments on all three suggestions: Discussion of specific examples of protocols supporting accessibility should be used. Sun's recommendation clearly indicates that a misunderstanding has occurred here. Sun's recommendation talks about presentation technologies and not the underlying protocols used to deliver the content for presentation. Protocols are technologies and do include accessibility features. IBM presents the idea that Level 1.2 and 1.3 are not needed due to Checkpoint 5.4. Ian states that Checkpoints 5.3 and 5.4 should be combined due to UAAG. IBM recommends changing "Java program" to "Java applet". This appears to assume that the only issues would be with applets and not full-blown Java programs requiring access to the Web to perform its functions. Any program that requires access to the Web provides content and should be required to meet the accessibility requirements of the WCAG. Limiting the requirements to those programs that visually appear inside a web page limits the effectiveness of the WCAG and could provide grounds for later debate. Sincerely, Lee Roberts President/CEO 405-321-6372 Rose Rock Design, Inc. <http://www.roserockdesign.com> http://www.roserockdesign.com ************************************************************************ ** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. Thank you for your compliance.
Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2003 09:06:21 UTC