RE: BIG ISSUE -- re Delivery Units

Bruce wrote:
> There has *not* been an explanation why Authored Unit is not a
satisfactory replacement for Delivery Unit (for most places in SC of the
current public draft).


Indeed there hasn't.  In fact - Authored Unit may be what we are looking
for.    I just looked at the definition.  It had been eliminated earlier but
I'm not at all sure why now. 

Let us look into that.  

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 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Bailey, Bruce
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 10:25 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: BIG ISSUE -- re Delivery Units


> No I don't like the term Web unit - but no other term exists that 
> means what we need.

There has *not* been an explanation why Authored Unit is not a satisfactory
replacement for Delivery Unit (for most places in SC of the current public
draft).

> Please re-read the thread carefully.
> The same issues and suggestions keep getting raised and answered and 
> re-raised.  I will be happy to respond to new questions but don't want 
> to keep reposting the same information repeatedly.

The discussion of Authored Unit has its own thread[1] but that was only in
the context only of eliminating the term from the definition of Structure.
The reasoning why Delivery Unit and Perceivable Unit are not close
equivalents to Web Unit has been lucid.  Authored Unit has not been given
the same treatment.

> We either have to add a term like this or add 18 words or more to the 
> 9 or so sc that use the term delivery unit.

My exercise[2] of removing DU from the eleven impacted SC resulted in ten of
them being *shorter* and more readable (2.4.4 was the exception).  There has
not been discussion if that results in the SC being too imprecise or
otherwise degraded.

>> The problem is not the DU, but the conformance statement.

> How do you fix the problem in the SC with a change to the conformance 
> statement?  Would be an easy fix - but I don't see how.

I tried[2] to patch 2.4.4 (Content has titles wherever applicable to the
baseline technology) to make it appropriately conditional.  If 2.4.4 is
rewritten to use Web Unit, there is still a problem (but fixing 10 out 11 is
certainly better than 1 out of 11 using the correct DI term), so the
immediate terminology issue has been mitigated but not completely solved
with the introduction of Web Unit.

Why can't the common sense concept of "when applicable to the chosen
baseline technology" (wording needs to be improved) shifted into the body of
WCAG 2.0?  Such a tactic would also eliminate the current pressing reason to
avoid Delivery Unit.  The conformance section seems to be a logical place
for this.  (I would be pleased to offer a take at this, but isn't the
current version recognized to be in rough shape anyway?)

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2006JanMar/0217.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2006JanMar/0248.html

Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 00:29:32 UTC