- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:41:13 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
- Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20060616103807.01c82988@mailserver.nist.gov>
What objectively determines/measures a "distinct chunk of content" for this definition (as opposed to alternatives? Perhaps expand/further define what is a "distinct chunk of content"? There are some examples given, but perhaps more definition is needed? Thanks and best wishes Tim Boland NIST At 10:32 AM 6/16/2006 -0400, you wrote: >I like it& > > > >access empowers people... > > ...barriers disable them... > > > ><http://www.eramp.com>www.eramp.com > >---------- >From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] >Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 10:27 AM >To: 'John M Slatin'; 'David MacDonald'; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org >Subject: RE: Definition of "Relationships" > > > >Agree. > >Also talk about form controls > > > > > >Hmmmm > > > >So maybe something like: > > > > > >Definition of *Relationships*: > > > >"semantic associations between distinct chunks of content" > > > >Examples of chunks that have relationships include: a heading and the >paragraph which follows it; a section title and the subsections that are >within it; a control and its label; the boxes in an organization or flow >chart; and table cells and their headers. > > > > > >Other comments? > > >Gregg > > -- ------------------------------ >Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. >Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. >Director - Trace R & D Center >University of Wisconsin-Madison >The Player for my DSS sound file is at ><http://tinyurl.com/dho6b>http://tinyurl.com/dho6b<http://tinyurl.com/cmfd9> > >---------- >From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On >Behalf Of John M Slatin >Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 7:59 AM >To: David MacDonald; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org >Subject: RE: Definition of "Relationships" > > > >Thanks, David! > > > >It might be good to add a non-text example, e.g., "Associations between >positions shown in an organizational chart" or "Associations beteween >decision-points in a flow-chart" or something like that. > > > >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.ital.utexas.edu/>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 David MacDonald >Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 6:14 PM >To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org >Subject: Definition of "Relationships" >I had an action item with Katie to come up with a definition of Relationship& > >This is the proposal: > >Definition of *Relationships*: > >"Semantic associations between distinct chunks of content." > Example 1: A heading is in relationship to the paragraph which > follows it. > Example 2: A section title is in relationship to the subsections > that are within it. > > >----------------------- >Discussion: > >"Semantic" is another way to say "meaningful" (as per the Wikipaedia >definition of Semantic) ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic > >So the definition could also be: > >"Meaningful associations between distinct chunks of content." But I think >semantic works better. > >"chunks" could be replaced by "portions" or "sections" but I think >"chunks" is very understandable. > >David MacDonald > >access empowers people... > ...barriers disable them... > ><http://www.eramp.com>www.eramp.com >
Received on Friday, 16 June 2006 14:41:47 UTC