- From: Yvette P. Hoitink <y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl>
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:50:56 +0200
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi list, I took an action item to propose a simpler formulation for a new section about authoring tools. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0389.html for the original suggestion by the ATAG working group. <proposal 1> Authoring tools A large part of web content is created using authoring tools. These tools often determine how the web content is implemented, by making authoring decisions directly or by presenting choices to the author. We understand that the level of accessibility of the web content produced by authoring tools will depend on the support of the accessibility guidelines by these tools, even though we recommend that all authors become familiar with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. Developers of authoring tools can help to make their tools more aware of the Web Accessibility Guidelines by following the #Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines#. We encourage users and purchasers of authoring tools to consider the conformance to the #Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines# when selecting tools. </proposal 1> The texts between ## would be links to the ATAG. Basically, I re-wrote some sentences to make them shorter and easier to understand, in some cases using active voice instead of passive. I have tried not to change the meaning or intentions of the original text. I used "the way the web content is implemented" instead of "nature of the web content" because I think AT do NOT affect the nature of the content (e.g. a genealogical website versus a gallery website) but only the implementation of the content. I deleted the part about the implementation techniques for ATAG being available, because I think that would be confusing to many of our audience and I think AT developers (a secondary audience of our guidelines) will have no problems finding the information by following the ATAG link. A problem I see both with the original proposal and in mine is that it sounds like we're saying "we recommend that you become familiar with WCAG but we understand it if your content doesn't comply if you use a non-ATAG AT". That sounds like a large loophole/excuse for people. Perhaps we should instead say something like "We understand that the level of accessibility of the web content produced by authoring tools will depend on the support of the accessibility guidelines by these tools. We recommend that all authors become familiar with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines because this will help in creating accessible content and some of the guidelines may not be covered by the authoring tool." Yvette Hoitink Heritas, Enschede, the Netherlands E-mail: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl WWW: http://www.heritas.nl
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 21:51:44 UTC