- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:05:36 -0600
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <C46A1118E0262B47BD5C202DA2490D1A1DFBD8@MAIL02.austin.utexas.edu>
Plain language version of Guideline 2.2 plus with success criteria, benefits, and examples This document contains a series of proposals for a "plain language_ rewording of WCAG 2.0 Guideline 2.2 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) 2, Checkpoint (now Guideline) 2.2, 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 2.2 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. Proposed wording for Guideline 2.2 2.2 [CORE] Allow users to control time limits on their reading, interaction, or responses unless specific real-time events or rules of competition make such control impossible. Current wording for Checkpoint 2.2, SC 1 1. content is designed so that time limits are not an essential part of interaction or at least one of the following is true for each time limit: * the user is allowed to deactivate the time limits, * or the user is allowed to adjust the time limit over a wide range which is at least ten times or default setting or average user's preference, * or the user is warned before time expires and given at least 10 seconds to extend the time limit, * or the time limit is due to a real-time event (e.g. auction) and no alternative to the time limit is possible, * or the time limit is part of a competitive activity where timing is an essential part of the activity (e.g. competitive gaming or time based testing). Proposed wording for Guideline 2.2, SC 1 1. content is designed so that time limits are not an essential part of interaction, or at least one of the following is true for each interaction for which a time limit has been set: * the user is allowed to deactivate the time limit; * the user is allowed to adjust the time limit over a wide range which is at least ten times the length of the default setting [js 10/26: deleted because there's no way for most developers to determine this]; * the user is warned before time expires and given at least 10 seconds to extend the time limit; [js 10/26: 10 seconds isn't long enough. MS Windows used to give you 15 seconds to accept changes to the Display control panel, and it wasn't long enough to let me listen to the entire dialog and then tab to the OK button.] * the time limit is an important part of a real-time event such as an auction, and no alternative to the time limit is possible; * or the time limit is part of a competitive activity where timing is an essential part of the activity (e.g. competitive gaming; * an online test must be completed within a set time which has already been increased to accommodate people with disabilities who are allowed by law to take additional time Current wording for Best Practice Measures for Checkpoint 2.2 1. any moving content can be frozen using the keyboard[ I#325] Proposed wording for Best Practice Measures for Guideline 2.2 1. moving content can be permanently or temporarily stopped using the keyboard [I#325] Current wording for Benefits of Checkpoint 2.2 People with reading disabilities, cognitive disabilities, and learning disabilities often need more time than most people to read and comprehend written text. People with physical disabilities might not be able to move quickly or accurately enough to interact with moving objects. Content that is updated often might not be processed and read in time or in the proper order by an assistive technology or voice browser. Proposed wording for Who benefits from Checkpoint 2.2 (Informative) * People with reading disabilities, cognitive disabilities, and learning disabilities benefit from additional time to read and comprehend written text. * People with low vision who use screen magnification software benefit from improved ability to track content that moves. * People who do not see well, people who cannot read quickly or follow rapidly changing events, and people with limited use of their hands benefit from the ability to increase the time for gathering information and interacting with the content. Current wording for Examples of Checkpoint 2.2 * Examples of content that requires comprehension or a response within a timed interval: * automatic refresh * redirection * blinking or scrolling text * dialog that disappears after a short period * shutdown or deactivation of page if activity is not received in a set amount of time * Example 1: blinking text. Client-side scripting is used to create blinking text. The user can deactivate the use of scripting in his or her browser or override the use of scripts with a user style sheet. * Example 2: a news site that is updated regularly. A news site causes its front page to be updated every 1/2 hour. The front page contains minimal text and primarily consists of links to content. A user who does not wish the page to update selects a checkbox. The checkbox is in the "user preferences" portion of the site which is one of the first links on each page. Proposed wording for Examples of Guideline 2.2 (Informative) * Content that requires comprehension or a response within a timed interval, including (but not limited to) the following: * a screen that refreshes automatically every 5 seconds * a pages that automatically redirects the browser to a different page or site * blinking or scrolling text * a dialog box that disappears automatically after a short period * a page that automatically logs the user out if no activity occurs within a set amount of time * Example 1: blinking text. Some pages on a Web site use blinking text to call attention to new items. Users can select a single option to turn off blinking throughout the site. * Example 2: a news site that is updated regularly. A news site causes its front page to be updated every 30 minutes. The front page contains minimal text and primarily consists of links to content. A user who does not wish the page to update selects a checkbox. The checkbox is in the "user preferences" portion of the site which is one of the first links on each page. Example 3. A multiple-choice test. An online examination is scheduled to last 50 minutes. The administrator changes the time to 75 minutes to accommodate a student with a learning disability. Other students must still complete the test in 50 minutes. Example 4. An online banking site. An online banking site limits each session to 15 minutes. The Webmaster increases the time limit for a customer with cerebral palsy. "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 16:05:38 UTC