W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2004

Re: Backoffice: must conform to WCAG?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 19:26:30 -0500 (EST)
To: Marja-Riitta Koivunen <marja@annotea.org>
Cc: Matt May <mcmay@w3.org>, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0403251919030.8966@homer.w3.org>

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Marja-Riitta Koivunen wrote:

>At 02:17 PM 3/24/2004 -0800, Matt May wrote:
>>On Mar 24, 2004, at 10:15 AM, Marja-Riitta Koivunen wrote:
>>>I think most of the data will end up to be presented to the humans in one
>>>way or the other even when it goes through some intermediate processing
>>>by the machines.
>>But we can't determine accessibility in a piece of content until it's
>>final form.
>I agree in principle. (Although in my mind metadata may also be quite close
>to that final form. Especially if we define some style rules for presenting
>the metadata.)
>Is it good practise if I have some metadata that includes properties for
>images but not properties for alternative equivalents for the images?
>These practices could be something that would go under XML accessibility
>guidelines? Or metadata accessibility guidelines?
>In my mind authoring tools take care that the good practices are used e.g.
>when defining schemas and creating instances, but I think something else is
>needed to first define the practices.

A view from a semi-outsider (i.e. I have edited two of these four specs, but
this is a personal interpretation, not something that any of the relevant
groups have agreed is how they see it, and I can't speak for WAI either
since I don't work there anymore)

XML Accessibility Guidelines talk about what information you need to have to
begin with.  (They don't actually define who should provide it, but if it
isn't there then there is a problem). Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines
talk about how to put it together. WCAG talks about what the resulting
content should be. And User Agent Accessibility Guidelines talk about how
browsers should be able to present it...

There are some dependencies. Authoring Tools are aiming to produce stuff that
conforms to relevant guidelines - mostly WCAG, for producing pages, but for
producing schemas (which is often done with authoring tools) XAG is the
important reference. XAG itself is based on what is needed in a language so
that you can implement ATAG- and UAAG-conformant tools, and produce
WCAG-conformant content. UAAG and WCAG have a more complex
interdependent relationship - a problem can generally be solved by the
content author, by the user agent, or by both. So these two guidelines need
to actually figure out some idea about how to divide responsibilities, where
it makes sense to have an overlap, etc.

my 2 cents worth


>>>It is good to keep accessibility in mind when storing, retrieving and
>>>processing data. In that way we can make sure that when the data is
>>>presented for the users it has a better chance to be accessible.
>>Systems that store, retrieve and process data are what we call authoring
>>The Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 draft defines "authoring
>>tool" [1] as:
>>"Any software or service that authors may use to create or modify Web
>>content for publication."
>>Note the subsection in that definition, titled "Indirect Authoring Functions":
>>"Authors have control of only high-level parameters related to the
>>automated production of the resulting Web content. This may include
>>interfaces that assist the author to create and organize Web content
>>without the author having control over the markup or programming
>>implementation." That sounds like a whole lot of Web applications out
>>there, to me. Certainly anything that calls itself a content management
>>system, at least.
>>It is ATAG's job to determine how to store, retrieve and process data in
>>Web-based applications in a way that ensures WCAG-conformant content.
>>[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-ATAG20-20040224/#what-auth-tool

Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134 136
SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe         fax(france): +33 4 92 38 78 22
 Post:   21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia    or
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Thursday, 25 March 2004 19:26:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:33 UTC