Proposed Revisions to Guideline 1.1

Issue #1004 [1] raises several issues with the level 1 criterion of guideline 1.1 in our current draft [2]. 

The following proposal is an attempt to address these issues and is the result of an email exchange that took place between John, Gregg, Wendy, Jason, Michael and I last month.

The proposal splits one criteria (with five sub-parts) into six separate criterion. While this increases the length of the guideline, one of the main benefits of this approach is that it simplifies linkages from the techniques documents and checklists and addresses some ambiguities around cases where non-text content falls into more than one category (ex. an image that is both used to convey information and to create a specific sensory experience). 

<proposed level 1 criteria for guideline 1.1> 
 
1. For all non-text content that is functional, such as graphical links or buttons, text-alternatives identify the purpose or function of the non-text content. [I]

2. For all non-text content that is used to convey information, text-alternatives convey the same information. [I]

3. For non-text content that is intended to create a specific sensory
experience, such as music or visual art, text-alternatives identify and
describe the non-text content. [I]

4. For multimedia and time-dependent interactive content, text-alternatives identify the content and media alternatives are provided as described in guideline 1.2.  [I]

5. Non-text content that does not provide information, functionality,
sensory experience or is not multimedia or time-dependent interactive
content, is marked such that it can be ignored by assistive technology. [I]

6. Any text-alternatives provided are explicitly associated with non-text content. [I]

</ proposed>

[1] http://tinyurl.com/3rsn3 
[2] http://tinyurl.com/5jpdm 

--
Ben Caldwell | <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu>
Trace Research and Development Center <http://trace.wisc.edu>

Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2004 19:32:20 UTC