Re: Revisiting whether & when we might write a technique related to SC 1.4.2 and OS per-app volume settings [was 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,

Is 1.4.4 invalidated?  No.  It is just met automatically most of the 
time (by pretty universal user-agent zoom), and responsible authors 
check to make sure they didn't break it (and it can be broken - e.g. 
with embedded content rendered by plug-ins, etc.).

What is being discussed, I think, is the first step toward 1.4.2 being 
met automatically most of the time, through the possible creation of a 
success technique that works today - in a more cumbersome way than would 
be ideal (though arguably no MORE cumbersome than on existing web pages) 
- on two OS releases.


Regards,

Peter

On 6/27/2013 1:16 PM, David MacDonald wrote:
> Aren't we just basically invalidating 1.4.2  and letting authors say 
> "it's not my problem my music bugs you, learn your os?  I'm not 
> convinced ...
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2013-06-27, at 2:11 PM, Loretta Guarino Reid 
> <lorettaguarino@google.com <mailto:lorettaguarino@google.com>> wrote:
>
> Just a few opinions from me:
> 1. I think there is probably no reason this couldn't be a sufficient 
> technique, with the usual accessibility support caveats
> 2. Publishing it as a WCAG technique only helps in making authors more 
> aware of it. It does not help with the problem of how to reach end 
> users who would be expected to know about this setting.
> 3. Do we really think that documenting this particular technique, 
> which has the issues that have been discussed, is a more important use 
> of our time than all of the other potential work the WG has before us? 
> (That said, we've probably spent more time discussing it than it would 
> take to write it up.)
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com 
> <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Colleagues (and especially Gregg),
>
>     Given the note from Christophe below pointing out that we have a
>     second desktop OS that offers this functionality (Linux with
>     GNOME), and a message earlier today from Ramón Corominas pointing
>     out that we have techniques for PDF accessibility that appear to
>     only work on a single platform (Windows), I find myself wondering
>     if there we aren't being consistent in when WCAG may publish a
>     technique for meeting a success criteria.
>
>     It seems to me the argument now boils down to "too few users know
>     about this option" (since the argument "this option isn't
>     available in enough places" doesn't seem to have prevented PDF
>     techniques).
>
>     If that is the case, then wouldn't publishing a technique - which
>     made clear it required recent versions of Windows and/or GNOME -
>     BE a way of getting more publicity for this?  And wouldn't it BE a
>     way to better bring it to the attention of user agent & platform
>     creators?
>
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Peter
>
>     On 6/27/2013 7:57 AM, Christophe Strobbe wrote:
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     Am Do, 27.06.2013, 07:02 schrieb Peter Korn:
>>>     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,
>>     The "technique" is listed in "Better Web Browsing: Tips for Customizing
>>     Your Computer" at<http://www.w3.org/WAI/users/browsing#volume>  <http://www.w3.org/WAI/users/browsing#volume>. The link
>>     related to Windows 7 points to a Microsoft webpage with a video that also
>>     shows the mixer.
>>
>>     Best regards,
>>
>>     Christophe
>>
>>     PS: GNOME's sound volume also allows you to set the volume on an
>>     application basis, but the Applications tab on the sound settings dialog
>>     only displays applications that are currently rendering sound. See the
>>     screen shots at
>>     <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/VolumeControl#User_Experience>  <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/VolumeControl#User_Experience>. I
>>     did a quick test with Firefox and YouTube on Fedora 18, set the volume for
>>     Firefox to a much lower volume than overall system volume, and the system
>>     seemed to remember the Firefox volume both after restarting the browser
>>     and after restarting the OS.
>>
>>
>>>     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
>>>>
>>>>     **
>>>>
>>>>     *Can**Adapt**Solutions Inc.*//
>>>>
>>>>     /Adapting the web to *all* users/
>>>>
>>>>     /Including those with disabilities/
>>>>
>>>>     www.Can-Adapt.com  <http://www.Can-Adapt.com>  <http://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  <mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com>; 'Adam Solomon'; 'Gregg Vanderheiden';
>>>>     'WCAG';kirsten@can-adapt.com  <mailto: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>  <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
>>>>
>>>>          **
>>>>
>>>>          *Can**Adapt**Solutions Inc.*
>>>>
>>>>          /Adapting the web to *all* users/
>>>>
>>>>          /Including those with disabilities/
>>>>
>>>>          www.Can-Adapt.com  <http://www.Can-Adapt.com>  <http://www.can-adapt.com/>  <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>>>>
>>>>          *From:*james.nurthen@oracle.com  <mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com>  <mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com>  <mailto: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  <mailto:kirsten@can-adapt.com>  <mailto:kirsten@can-adapt.com>  <mailto: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  <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>
>>>>          <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>  <mailto: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
>>>>
>>>>              **
>>>>
>>>>              *Can**Adapt**Solutions Inc.*
>>>>
>>>>              /Adapting the web to *all* users/
>>>>
>>>>              /Including those with disabilities/
>>>>
>>>>              www.Can-Adapt.com  <http://www.Can-Adapt.com>  <http://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  <mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu>  <mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu>  <mailto: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
>>>>              Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International -
>>>>              http://Raisingthefloor.org
>>>>              and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project -
>>>>              http://GPII.net
>>>>
>>>>              On Jun 26, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com  <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>
>>>>              <mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com>  <mailto: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
>>>>
>>>>                  --
>>>>                  <oracle_sig_logo.gif><http://www.oracle.com/>  <http://www.oracle.com/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                  Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
>>>>                  Phone:+1 650 5069522  <tel:%2B1%20650%205069522>  <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
>>>>                  500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064
>>>>
>>>>                  <green-for-email-sig_0.gif>
>>>>                  <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>  <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>  Oracle is committed to
>>>>                  developing practices and products that help protect the
>>>>                  environment
>>>>
>>>>     --
>>>>     Oracle<http://www.oracle.com>  <http://www.oracle.com>
>>>>     Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
>>>>     Phone:+1 650 5069522  <tel:%2B1%20650%205069522>  <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
>>>>     500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064
>>>>     Green Oracle<http://www.oracle.com/commitment>  <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>Oracle is committed to
>>>>     developing practices and products that help protect the environment
>>>>
>>>     --
>>>     Oracle<http://www.oracle.com>  <http://www.oracle.com>
>>>     Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
>>>     Phone:+1 650 5069522  <tel:%2B1%20650%205069522>  <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
>>>     500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
>>>     Green Oracle<http://www.oracle.com/commitment>  <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>  Oracle is committed to
>>>     developing practices and products that help protect the environment
>>>
>
>     -- 
>     <oracle_sig_logo.gif> <http://www.oracle.com>
>     Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
>     Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
>     500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064
>     <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>
>     Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help
>     protect the environment
>
>

-- 
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522>
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94064
Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to 
developing practices and products that help protect the environment

Received on Thursday, 27 June 2013 20:45:50 UTC