- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 09:50:17 -0400
- To: "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "'Peter Korn'" <peter.korn@oracle.com>
- CC: <james.nurthen@oracle.com>, "'Adam Solomon'" <adam.solomon2@gmail.com>, "'WCAG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, <kirsten@can-adapt.com>, <kirsten@can-adapt.com>
- Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP1457966FED7AAF9F46F530FE750@phx.gbl>
Hi Peter
Ok, I think I understand what you are talking about ... it is a great 10,000
foot view of how it might rollout... and it is important that someone have a
10,000 view, that's how great stuff happens... vision... one of your many
gifts.
You are seeing what it might look like if it is adopted and if decision
makers in the OS teams and browser teams catch the vision and give it a
browser button control or shortcut etc... and if users get exposed to it...
etc.
I'm interested on how we might get from here to there with so many busy
stakeholders, the tactical and operation steps to get there from where we
are, few knows about it, has many steps, works only for some browsers, and
difficult to turn on and off where someone actually does want to listen to
sound on the page, news, YouTube, music etc...
Seems like it might be easier to go to the jQuery folks and get a widget or
something like that and point to that as a resource.
Cheers
David MacDonald
CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
Adapting the web to all users
Including those with disabilities
<http://www.can-adapt.com/> www.Can-Adapt.com
From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu]
Sent: June-27-13 2:20 AM
To: Peter Korn
Cc: David MacDonald; james.nurthen@oracle.com; 'Adam Solomon'; 'WCAG';
kirsten@can-adapt.com
Subject: Re: Question about SC 1.4.2 - can this be met by relying on Windows
(or otherwise the platform or user agent) to do it for you?
I think this is a very good summary Peter
A couple comments.
And if I may summarize the discussion/insights:
* Technically this is a way to meet this SC (assuming you are running
on Windows 7 or some other OS that offers this feature)
(assuming the viewers of your web page are.....)
* Some are dubious this would be approved as a formal WCAG technique,
for several different reasons
* Some like this approach as it offers a single choke point vs. the
work that every web page author would have to do
Agree. Choke point doesn't quite seem the right word - but yes -- solving
this by having better user agents, rather than requiring authors to all do
something, is by far the superior approach and what we should work toward.
My own sense is that this functionality would be worth advertising more
widely, so folks knew about it,
absolutely -- got some ideas how to do so?
- add to user workshops?
- get into user newsletters?
and we gained some more experience with users using it - and then the extent
to which they liked/disliked it.
Yes - and separate how they like the feature from how they like the ease of
use of it. (which could be then improved.)
More OSes might be persuaded to offer functionality like this. User agents
might be persuaded to offer this functionality directly. And both OSes and
user agents might find ways to offer the functionality with fewer steps.
Yes. I think a plug in for browsers could be a first start for testing?
And then somewhere along the continuum of these potential user agent /
platform improvements, it might be sufficiently widespread and sufficiently
easy that there would be little objection to adding this as a sufficient
technique, similar to how we treat browser zoom.
It would then be a natural for a technique.
Because doing this once and easily in a single place has got to be
preferable to every audio-playing browser page implementing it in their own
way...
yep
Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info
Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project - http://GPII.net
On Jun 27, 2013, at 7:02 AM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com> wrote:
David,
I started this thread after reading a computer advice columnist describe
this feature to a supplicant who was complaining about websites
automatically playing sounds/music, which interfered with his enjoyment of
the music he was already playing from some other (non-web) app. And I
realized... we have a potential electronic curb cut here!
So I brought it to this group seeking discussion and insights - which I've
received!
And if I may summarize the discussion/insights:
* Technically this is a way to meet this SC (assuming you are running
on Windows 7 or some other OS that offers this feature)
* Some are dubious this would be approved as a formal WCAG technique,
for several different reasons
* Some like this approach as it offers a single choke point vs. the
work that every web page author would have to do
My own sense is that this functionality would be worth advertising more
widely, so folks knew about it, and we gained some more experience with
users using it - and then the extent to which they liked/disliked it. More
OSes might be persuaded to offer functionality like this. User agents might
be persuaded to offer this functionality directly. And both OSes and user
agents might find ways to offer the functionality with fewer steps.
And then somewhere along the continuum of these potential user agent /
platform improvements, it might be sufficiently widespread and sufficiently
easy that there would be little objection to adding this as a sufficient
technique, similar to how we treat browser zoom.
Because doing this once and easily in a single place has got to be
preferable to every audio-playing browser page implementing it in their own
way...
Regards,
Peter
On 6/26/2013 6:17 PM, David MacDonald wrote:
Hi Peter
1.4.4 language came after many iterations ... I would probably be loath to
hold it up as a jumping off precedent...
the techniques for 1.4.4 are about "not interfering" with the browsers
natural ability to zoom... there is no advice to users, except in an
indirect way ... it's to the authors...
Perhaps we could create a failure if authors interfere with the OS natural
ability to turn down the volume of the browser like we do in 1.4.4... but it
leaves me scratching my head.
I'm probably coming to this discussion a bit late, and I'm not sure what
problem that we are trying to solve with these contortions... perhaps there
is some good reason... if so perhaps I'll join in the "contorting" after a
June 30 deadlines...
Cheers
David MacDonald
CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
Adapting the web to all users
Including those with disabilities
www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
From: Peter Korn [mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com]
Sent: June-26-13 6:36 PM
To: David MacDonald
Cc: james.nurthen@oracle.com; 'Adam Solomon'; 'Gregg Vanderheiden'; 'WCAG';
kirsten@can-adapt.com
Subject: Re: Question about SC 1.4.2 - can this be met by relying on Windows
(or otherwise the platform or user agent) to do it for you?
David,
I'm curious - how is this "user technique" of the user turning down or
muting the volume of their user agent in their OS any different from another
"user technique" of the user having their web user agent enlarge the content
on a web page (as a mechanism for meeting SC 1.4.4 Resize Text)?
In other words, how is G142: Using a technology that has commonly-available
user agents that support zoom
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20120103/G142> any different
form a potential technique like: "Using a technology that can independently
adjust or mute user agent volume levels"?
Both are "user techniques" rather than "authoring techniques". And both
tend to always work (though both should be tested; I can imagine some hacky
ways of bypassing OS-level volume settings using downloaded native code).
Peter
On 6/26/2013 3:10 PM, David MacDonald wrote:
Right you are James,
It's down an extra layer in the mixer, so this volume would have to be off
before the person starts surfing. No way to get to it with music playing.
It is not so much an authoring technique, it is a user technique, and we
generally don't get into telling folks how to use their own technology,
although we have a few examples in the techniques, of user agent notes with
JAWS commands...
But I think we need a bright line between Authoring techniques for our
"Authoring Guidelines" and strategies for users... the latter is not an
authoring technique which is our mandate.
Cheers
David MacDonald
CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
Adapting the web to all users
Including those with disabilities
www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
From: james.nurthen@oracle.com [mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com]
Sent: June-26-13 5:13 PM
To: David MacDonald
Cc: Adam Solomon; Gregg Vanderheiden; Peter Korn; WCAG;
kirsten@can-adapt.com
Subject: Re: Question about SC 1.4.2 - can this be met by relying on Windows
(or otherwise the platform or user agent) to do it for you?
On my version of windows 7 I can reduce the volume of Firefox/ie without
reducing my jaws volume.
On Jun 26, 2013, at 14:07, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote:
I just checked this... it turns off the Screen Reader also, so no I would
say not.
The whole point is so the screen reader can be hear without music drowning
it out.
Cheers
David MacDonald
CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
Adapting the web to all users
Including those with disabilities
www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
From: Adam Solomon [mailto:adam.solomon2@gmail.com]
Sent: June-26-13 4:40 PM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: Peter Korn; WCAG
Subject: Re: Question about SC 1.4.2 - can this be met by relying on Windows
(or otherwise the platform or user agent) to do it for you?
Would it not be sufficient to be in an environment where one has access to,
but is not limited to windows 7? We have considered techniques that have
support only in certain browsers, especially the infamous "headers
technique" relying on a plugin. With regard to web technology I believe we
have said in the meetings that support for a certain technique does not have
to be across the board. Is an operating system different in this regard?
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
wrote:
Yes that would be a technique if you are in an environment that guarantees
that only Windows 7 (or whatever versions) are used by people viewing the
web page. Not sure how you would enforce that. Otherwise it would not
work.
So we couldn't list it as a sufficient tech I wouldn't think.
Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info
<http://cloud4all.info/>
Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org
<http://raisingthefloor.org/>
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project - http://GPII.net
<http://gpii.net/>
On Jun 26, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com> wrote:
Colleagues,
I was recently reminded that Windows 7 (and perhaps earlier) has a nice
feature in the "Volume Mixer" panel, which provides support for independent,
per-application setting of the volume level (including per-application
muting). This specifically allows me to turn down or off the volume of all
audio coming from my web user agent.
Would you agree that this would be "a mechanism [that] is available to
control audio volume independently from the overall system volume level",
such that web pages/apps running on Windows 7 could automatically meet SC
1.4.2 Audio Control?
If so, is this perhaps a potential new success technique for us? Something
like "Running on a platform or user agent that allows the volume level to be
adjusted or muted either by the user agent or on a per-application basis"?
On the other hand... would doing this effectively prevent the use of
cloud-based AT? If I'm not mistaken, we typically haven't done a lot in our
techniques that contemplates web-delivered/cloud-based AT...
Regards,
Peter
--
<http://www.oracle.com/> <oracle_sig_logo.gif>
Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064
<http://www.oracle.com/commitment> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> Oracle is
committed to developing practices and products that help protect the
environment
--
<http://www.oracle.com/> Oracle
Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064
<http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Green
OracleOracle is committed to developing practices and products that help
protect the environment
--
<http://www.oracle.com/> <oracle_sig_logo.gif>
Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
<http://www.oracle.com/commitment> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> Oracle is
committed to developing practices and products that help protect the
environment
Received on Thursday, 27 June 2013 13:51:05 UTC