- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:47:25 -0600
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <C46A1118E0262B47BD5C202DA2490D1A1DFBC8@MAIL02.austin.utexas.edu>
Plain language version of Guideline 1.3 plus success criteria, benefits, and examples This document contains a series of proposals for a "plain language_ rewording of WCAG 2.0 Checkpoint 1.3 with Success Criteria, Examples, and Benefits This is submitted in partial fulfillment of an action item taken by John Slatin, Katie Haritos-Shay, and Doyle Burnett during a call in late September or early October, to generate a plain-language version of WCAG 2. This message is partial in two ways: (1) It addresses only Guideline (now Principle) 1, Checkpoint (now Guideline) 1.3, and the relevant success criteria, examples, and benefits. Other guidelines, etc., will follow. (2) It is not really "plain language," in the sense that this text has not yet been compared to the 1500-word "special lexicon" used by Voice of America (or other similar lexicons). Thus it's actually best understood as an attempt to simplify and clarify. We're still working on the formal plain language issues, but wanted to put this out to start generating discussion. Items labeled "Current wording" are taken from the September document Reorg 4, available at http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2003/09/reorg4.html <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2003/09/reorg4.html> . This document was current at the time Katie and Doyle and I took on the action item to attempt a plain language version. Of course the proposed rewordings will need to be correlated with later updates. Current wording for checkpoint 1.3 1.3 [CORE] Information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation. Proposed wording for Guideline 1.3 1.3 [CORE] Make information, structure, and functionality recognizable even when users or user agents change the presentation format. Current wording for Checkpoint 1.3 SC 1 1. the following can be derived programmatically (i.e. through a markup or data model that is assistive technology compatible) from the content without requiring user interpretation of presentation. A. any hierarchical elements and relationships, such as headings, paragraphs and lists B. any non-hierarchical relationships between elements such as cross-references and linkages, associations between labels and controls, associations between cells and their headers, etc. C. any emphasis Proposed wording for Guideline 1.3 SC 1 Data models or markup are used to enable assistive technology to recognize relationships among content elements, including (but not limited to) those listed below: A. hierarchical elements and relationships, such as headings, paragraphs and lists B. non-hierarchical relationships between elements such as * cross-references and linkages, * associations between labels and controls, * associations between table cells and their headers [js note: these should probably be listed as examples of hierarchical relationships instead of non-hierarchical] * etc. C. emphasis on specific words and phrases Current wording for Checkpoint 1.3 SC 2 2. any information presented through color is also available without color (e.g. through context or markup or non-color dependent coding). [ I#317] Proposed wording for Guideline 1.3 SC 2 2. any information presented through color is also available without color, for example through context, markup, or coding that does not depend on color. I#317] Current wording for Checkpoint 1.3 SC3 3. text content is not presented over a background image or pattern OR the text is easily readable when the page is viewed in black and white (no grayscale). Proposed wording for Guideline 1.3 SC 3 3. text is not presented over a background image or pattern, or if a background image or pattern is present then the text is readable when the page is viewed in black and white. [js Doesn't this belong under Extended? Seems nearly duplicate of 1.6] Current wording for Best Practice Measures for Checkpoint 1.3 Best Practice Measures for Checkpoint 1.3 1. any information presented using color is also available without color and without having to interpret markup.[ I#317] 2. any blinking content can be turned off.[ I#325] Proposed wording for Best Practice Measures for Guideline 1.3 1. Information presented using color is also available without color , for example through context or markup or coding that does not depend on color. [I#317] 2. blinking content can be turned off.[I#325] Current wording for Benefits of Checkpoint 1.3 Benefits of Checkpoint 1.3 (Informative) * Separating content and structure from presentation allows Web pages to be presented differently to meet the needs and constraints of different users without losing any of the information or structure. For example, information can be presented via speech or braille (text) that was originally intended to be presented visually. * It can also facilitate automatic emphasis of structure or more efficient navigation. * All of these can benefit people with cognitive, physical, hearing, and visual disabilities. Proposed wording for Who Benefits from Guideline 1.3 * People with cognitive and learning impairments; people with visual impairments; and people with limited use of their hands benefit from the ability to navigate by structural elements * People with cognitive and learning impairments; people with visual impairments; people with limited use of their hands; and people with hearing impairments benefit when information, structure, and functionality are preserved in all presentation formats. * People with cognitive and learning impairments; people with visual impairments; and people with hearing impairments benefit from the ability to emphasize structural elements automatically in the form best suited to their needs. Current wording for Examples of Checkpoint 1.3 Examples of Checkpoint 1.3 (Informative) * Example 1: a multi-column document. A document is marked up with headings, paragraphs and other structural features. It is presented visually in three columns. The markup that creates the columns is separate from the markup that specifies the logical structure of the document. * Example 2: a scrolling list of stock prices. Current stock quotes are scrolled horizontally across the screen. The data are separate from the methods used to scroll the text across the page. * Example 3: a 3-dimensional site map. A custom user interface renders 3D visualizations of the pages on a site and how they relate to one another from a data source. Any hierarchical relationships, groupings, cross-references, etc. would originate in the data source so that alternate interfaces could be rendered (from the same source) that expose the structure of the site in an accessible form. (See also checkpoint 4.3) * Example 4: a list that allows users to sort information on a page according to preference. A script allows a user to rearrange a categorical listing of music files by date, artist, genre, or file size. The script updates both the structure and the presentation accordingly when generating alternate views. Proposed wording for Examples of Guideline 1.3 * Example 1: a multi-column document. A document is marked up with headings, paragraphs, and other structural features. It is presented visually in three columns. The markup that creates the columns is separate from the markup that specifies the structural features of the document. * Example 2: a scrolling list of stock prices. Current stock prices are scrolled horizontally across the screen. The data are separate from the methods used to scroll the text across the page. * Example 3: a 3-dimensional site map. A custom interface uses a data source to generate three-dimensional visualizations of the pages on a site and how they relate to one another. Hierarchical relationships, groupings, cross-references, etc. are defined in the data source so that alternate interfaces that expose the structure of the site in an accessible way could be rendered from the same data source. (See also checkpoint 4.3) * Example 4: a list that allows users to sort information on a page in different ways. A script allows a user to rearrange a listing of music files by date, artist, genre, or file size. The script updates both the structure and the presentation appropriately when generating alternate views. "Good design is accessible design." Please note our new name and URL! John Slatin, Ph.D. Director, Accessibility Institute University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C 1 University Station G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/ <http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/>
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2003 11:47:26 UTC