- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 14:57:33 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <000601c6d1ee$b2e8a310$8c17a8c0@NC6000BAK>
In looking at the baseline issue, three questions have arisen that aren't covered well in current documentation on it. 1) What do we mean by a technology. Do we mean a particular specification or a general type? 2) What if there is an extension of a technology that someone developed. Is it included? What about modules that extend a technology? If they are supported by User agents including AT - shouldn't they be part of baseline? Are they? 3) What if there are features of a technology that are NOT supported by AT. And if using them would make a page (or that part of the page) inaccessible? Can they be used WITHOUT providing an accessible alternative? The following is a pass at answering these questions. Posted here for discussion. 1. We use WHOLE technologies in the Baseline (Like HTML or CSS). 2. We probably DO need to specify which versions (e.g. HTML 3.2 thru 4.01 ) 3. We also allow extensions (e.g. Embed) and modules where they are supported by AT and should be in a baseline. 4. If there is an element within a technology specification that is not supported by AT we can: a. Not include it as a sufficient technique (e.g. not include 'object' in our list of sufficient techniques) i. This does not say an author can't use it. ii. It just says that the author must defend the fact that it is usable and supported by user agents INCLUDING AT. b. If it is really fatal - and use of it would prevent an SC from working - we can list it as a failure. i. e.g. If eBook files have a setting that prevents it from being read by AT then it would fail 1.1.1 and you could list the use of that setting as a failure under 1.1.1. (NOTE: only things that clearly fail an SC can be listed as a failure. Failures do not tune or modify SC. They only make it clearer to people less familiar with the field when a failure has already occurred for an SC). This solves all the problems created by technologies that have particular features that either a) are not supported by AT or b) interfere with AT. It also allows addition of extensions to technologies where those extensions are supported by User Agents INCLUDING AT. It DOES assume that there is a tie between creating the Baselines and creating failures. If a technology with a bad feature (such as AT lockout) is put into the Baseline - then the use of the feature should be listed as a failure at the same time. Presumably, before a technology is put into a Baseline, there is a set of 'sufficient techniques and failures' available for it. This is all based on the assumption that only people who know AT will be putting together Baselines. All others should use Baselines created by those that do know AT because the Baseline concept is designed to recalibrate the guidelines to AT over time. Without AT knowledge, it isn't possible to create good Baselines. If an author chooses a reputable and up to date Baseline (e.g. WAI 2007 Baseline for General Internet Use) then they should not need to understand AT support (good if they do but not required). They should be able to use that baseline and the sufficient techniques and failures documented by WAI and be able to assume their content is accessible. If they use OTHER techniques than those documented as sufficient - then they would need to understand what they are doing and be ready to defend it. (This is standard "equivalent facilitation" approach). Gregg ------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison < <http://trace.wisc.edu/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848 The Player for my DSS sound file is at <http://tinyurl.com/dho6b> http://tinyurl.com/dho6b <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/>
Received on Wednesday, 6 September 2006 19:58:00 UTC