- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:31:48 -0600
- To: "Loretta Guarino Reid" <lguarino@adobe.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
After reading Andi's response (which I now can't find!), I'm still concerned about "navigational features" in technologies other than HTML. Even if it's true that links are the *only* navigational features in (X)HTML (and are thus covered by other SC), are there other technologies where that isn't true? For example, I've never heard JAWS refer to a link when reading Flash content-- it always talks about "buttons," which may or may not be navigational (sometimes a button just makes something happen, like playing an animation). Are there navigational features in, say, MathML or SVG that would not be covered by satisfying GL 1.3? (Not a rhetorical question; I don't know the answer...) John "Good design is accessible design." Dr. John M. Slatin, Director Accessibility Institute University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C 1 University Station G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu Web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Loretta Guarino Reid Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 9:14 AM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: GL 1.3 vs GL 2.4 The relationship between GL 1.3 and 2.4 emerged at the Face 2 Face meeting again, as well as questions about what is sufficient to meet the guidelines. The subgroup didn't come to a consensus, but seems to think that we have two alternatives: Option 1) * GL 1.3 L1 SC1 is interpreted to mean that any structure that can be expressed in a technology is expressed in a way that is programmatically determined * GL 1.3 L2 SC (optional, new): requires that structure is used to express certain relationships in the content, e.g. tables * GL 2.4 only addresses explicit navigation elements (i.e. links) and the use of structure for navigation is assumed to be addressed by GL 1.3 L1 Option 2) * GL 1.3, L1, SC 1 requires that structure be programmatically determined when information is lost in the linearization of the content. * GL 1.3, L2 adds a success criterion that requires all structure that can be expressed in the content * GL 2.4, L1 only addresses explicit navigation elements In both cases, we would remove reference to navigating by structure from GL 2.4. GL 2.4 appears to address recognizing links programmatically. Case 1 seems to be closer to what most other Success Criteria were assuming from GL 1.3. Case 2 is closer to the requirements of WCAG1, which only requires table mark-up at level 1 and requires other structural markup at level 2. Additional discussion can be found at http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Guideline_1.3#Progr amat ically_determined_and_Role Or http://tinyurl.com/dxvlg Does the working group want to have a survey on which of these options to adopt? Or include a discussion of the options in our working draft and solicit public feedback?
Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2005 21:32:05 UTC