- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:38:47 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <auto-000078629620@spamarrest.com>
Yvette proposed the following two comments by me be closed as per comments below I agree Gregg Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison 323. Skip Navigation Success Criteria for 2.4 [8] Gregg Vanderheiden suggested to add another success criteria about skipping links: " Users are able to skip over navigational bars or other blocks of links that are greater than 7 when reading with a synthesizer or navigating using keyboard. " This had been incorporated in the July 2003 review draft but has since then been replaced by " Large blocks of material that are repeated on multiple pages, such as navigation menus with more than 8 or more links, can be bypassed by people who use screen readers or who navigate via keyboard or keyboard interface. ". YPH: I think the current phrasing includes Greggs point, so I propose to check with Gregg if he agrees with that and then close this issue. 327. Making 1.5 item #1, level 2 more objective [9] Gregg Vanderheiden commented: Checkpoints have to be objective. The checkpoint 1 which is currently under best practice gets close, but then changes into an (e.g. black and white, small display, model, audio playback). If these are just examples, then it is unclear to the user what else the individual would need to do. Suggest that this is a good one for a "Level 2" checkpoint, but to do so, we would need to make it definite. The checkpoint 1 he refers to is "the structural emphases are chosen to be distinct on different major visual display types (e.g. black and white, small display, mono audio playback). " YPH: Gregg's comment is an ongoing effort to make checkpoints objectively testable. The particular success criteria he chooses as an example has been eliminated since his comment was made. I propose to recognize the ongoing general problem of testability but to close this item because it is no longer valid.
Received on Tuesday, 31 August 2004 13:38:59 UTC