RE: WCAG 2.0 Checkpoint "Handles" or Short Names

Hmmmm

This is the danger when we try to have handles that convey meaning -- rather
than just being handles,  we start trying to make the handles into
meaningful checkpoints.   If we could make the checkpoints that short and
still be accurate then we should.

Otherwise I think the handles should be only long enough to be distinct from
each other and to provide a memory cue.    The reader should not rely on the
handle for understanding -- but should return to the text of the checkpoint.
Else we will get into great trouble.

If you know the checkpoints - then the cues below should be enough for you
to identify each one.  If you don't know what the checkpoint says - then you
must look it up -- which is what we want people to do.    Not make up one in
their head based on a 3 word cue or phrase.

Perhaps like


1) Perceivable
  1.1  Equivalents
  1.2  Synchronize
  1.3  Separable 
  1.4  Unambiguous
  1.5  Emphasize
  1.6  Foreground

 2) Operable
  2.1  Keyboard 
  2.2  Time
  2.3  Flicker
  2.4  Navigation
  2.5  Error

3) Understandable
  3.1  Language
  3.2  Abbreviations
  3.3  Complexity
  3.4  Predictable

4)  Robust
  4.1  Specification
  4.2  Declared
  4.3  Accessible


Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Giorgio Brajnik
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 3:08 AM
To: rscano@iwa-italy.org
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: WCAG 2.0 Checkpoint "Handles" or Short Names


On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:00:14 +0200
"Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org> said:
> Good work Giorgio!
> I suggest a little change for "media equivalenti sincronizzati" with
> "Equivalente per i media sincronizzati", because the object of the point
is
> that there is a need of an equivalent (text, audio, ...) for the
sincronized
> media.

I don't agree. In my opinion the checkpoint

   Synchronized media equivalents are provided for time-dependent
   presentations.

says that equivalents of different media should be synchronized (with
these media). For example, success criterion #1 mentions audio track
being synchronized (when possible) with video.

The adjective "synchronized" applies to two or more media (eg. sound
and video), one of which is the equivalent. 
Therefore I think 'equivalent synchronized media' (i.e. media
equivalenti sincronizzati) is better than 'equivalents for
synchronized media' (i.e. equivalenti per media sincronizzati).

   Giorgio

> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Giorgio Brajnik" <giorgio@dimi.uniud.it>
> To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 1:46 PM
> Subject: RE: WCAG 2.0 Checkpoint "Handles" or Short Names
> 
> 
> > My suggestion for the short names of wcag20 checkpoints.
> >
> >         Giorgio Brajnik
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > Dip. di Matematica e Informatica   | voice: +39 (0432) 55.8445
> > Universita` di Udine               | fax:   +39 (0432) 55.8499
> > Via delle Scienze, 206             | email: giorgio@dimi.uniud.it
> > Loc. Rizzi -- 33100 Udine -- ITALY | http://www.dimi.uniud.it/~giorgio
> >
> >
> 
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> 
> 
> > Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 - "handles"
> >
> >
> > Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 - "handles"
> >
> >
> > annotated by Giorgio Brajnik on July 13 2003 with addition of English
and
> Italian handles.
> > Rationale: I thought of a user LIFT that can see these short names as
> references for the checkpoints. I would like these short names to keep as
> much meaning as possible, and actually express something (like 'keyboard
> operable' rather than just 'keyboard').
> >
> > 1.1 [CORE] All non-text content that can be expressed in words has a
text
> equivalent of the function or information that the non-text content was
> intended to convey. [was 1.1]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg Text Equivalents --- 
> >       GB Text equivalents Equivalenti testuali
> >
> >
> > 1.2 [CORE] Synchronized media equivalents are provided for
time-dependent
> presentations. [was 1.2]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg synchronized equivalents --- 
> >       GB equivalent synchronized media media equivalenti sincronizzati
> >
> >
> > 1.3 [CORE] Both [information/substance] and structure are separable from
> presentation. [was 1.3]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg separable from presentation (or just separable) --- 
> >       GB separable presentation presentazione separabile
> >
> >
> > 1.4 [CORE] All characters and words in the content can be unambiguously
> decoded. [was 1.6]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg decodable --- 
> >       GB decodable characters caratteri decodificabili
> >
> >
> > 1.5 [EXTENDED] Structure has been made perceivable to more people
through
> presentation(s), positioning, and labels. [was 1.4]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg emphasize structure --- 
> >       GB perceivable structure struttura percepibile
> >
> >
> > 1.6 [EXTENDED] Foreground content is easily differentiable from
background
> for both auditory and visual default presentations. [was 1.5]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg fore/background --- 
> >       GB differentiable fore/background primo piano/sfondo
differenziabili
> >
> >
> > 2.1 [CORE] All functionality is operable at a minimum through a keyboard
> or a keyboard interface. [was 2.1]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg keyboard --- 
> >       GB keyboard operable utilizzabile da tastiera
> >
> >
> > 2.2 [CORE] Users can control any time limits on their reading,
> interaction, or responses unless control is not possible due to nature of
> real time events or competition. [was 2.2]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg time limits --- 
> >       GB controllable time limits limiti temporali controllabili
> >
> >
> > 2.3 [CORE] User can avoid experiencing screen flicker. [was 2.3]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg flicker --- 
> >       GB avoidable flicker sfarfallamento evitabile
> >
> >
> > 2.4 [EXTENDED] Structure and/or alternate navigation mechanisms have
been
> added to facilitate orientation and movement in content. [was 3.1 and 3.2]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg orientation --- 
> >       GB structured content contenuto strutturato
> >
> >
> > 2.5 [EXTENDED] Methods are provided to minimize error and provide
graceful
> recovery. [was 3.5]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg Errors --- 
> >       GB minimized errors errori minimizzati
> >
> >
> > 3.1 [CORE] Language of content can be programmatically determined.[was
1.6
> partial]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg language ID --- 
> >       GB determinable language lingua determinabile
> >
> >
> > 3.2 [EXTENDED] The definition of abbreviations and acronyms can be
> unambiguously determined. [was 4.3]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg abbrevs etc --- 
> >       GB unambiguous abbreviations abbreviazioni non ambigue
> >
> >
> > 3.3 [EXTENDED] Content is written to be no more complex than is
necessary
> and/or supplement with simpler forms of the content.   [was 4.1 and 4.2]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg complexity --- 
> >       GB simple content contenuto semplice
> >
> >
> > 3.4 [EXTENDED] Layout and behavior of content is consistent or
> predictable, but not identical. [was 3.3 and 3.4]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg predictable layout --- 
> >       GB content consistency coerenza del contenuto
> >
> >
> > 4.1 [CORE] Technologies are used according to specification [was 5.1]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg specs and stds --- 
> >       GB standards (I'd like a 2-term phrase like 'satisfied standards',
> but this one is not nice enough) standard soddisfatti
> >
> >
> > 4.2 [EXTENDED] Technologies that are relied upon by the content are
> declared and widely available.[was 5.2]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg legacy --- 
> >       GB popular technologies tecnologie diffuse
> >
> >
> > 4.3 [EXTENDED] Technologies used for presentation and user interface
> support accessibility or alternate versions of the content are provided
that
> do support accessibility.[was 5.3 and 5.4]
> >      English Italian
> >       Katie, Gregg accessible or alternative --- 
> >       GB accessible technologies tecnologie accessibili
> >
> >
>

Received on Monday, 14 July 2003 12:37:54 UTC