- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 10:59:57 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
The definition of "authored unit" from Device Independence Glossary [1] is: "Some set of material created as a single entity by an author. Examples include a collection of markup, a style sheet, and a media resource, such as an image or audio clip" NOTE: "resource" in the previous definition is further defined from [1] as: "A network data object or service that can be identified by a URI. Resources may be available in multiple representations (e.g. multiple languages, data formats, size, resolutions) or vary in other ways. This term was taken verbatim from Hypertext Transfer Protocol - HTTP/1.1." NOTE: URI in the previous definition is further defined from [1] as: "A short string that uniquely identifies a resource, such as an HTML document, an image, a down-loadable file, a service, or an electronic mailbox. " (definition of URI and resource seem "circular" in [1], in that each is defined in terms of the other?) Are these definitions helpful at all in the context of the current discussion? Thanks and best wishes Tim Boland NIST [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/di-gloss/ At 06:22 PM 2/13/2006 -0600, you wrote: >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 16:01:09 UTC