Re: Completed restructuring Understanding 1.1.1

Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> I think the links need to agree with the title they link to. 
They already did, I think...
>
> Since the titles have a first letter capitalized -  the link to that
> title should too.
I've made that change. I don't see agreeing to the point of
capitalization is critical, I think it's better to be grammatical. But I
made the change so you can see it in context.
>
> Also - the BOLDing needs to be consistent as L pointed out.  I would
> just bold the whole titles like we do for other titles
As said in my reply to Loretta, I think bolding the entire title is less
effective, but I've done it anyways to show it in action. I particularly
think bolding the link, which is already emphasized by virtue of being a
link, is overkill. But I've done that to show it.
>
>
> I think we should also consider the following text
>
> instead of 
> ... using one of the following short text alternative techniques for
> Situation B
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2013/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20130314/text-equiv-all#text-equiv-all-situation-b-shorttext> *AND* one
> of the following long text alternative techniques for Situation B
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2013/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20130314/text-equiv-all#text-equiv-all-situation-b-longtext>:
>
> how about we use
>
> ....using a technique from the list of *Short text alternative
> techniques for Situation B*
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2013/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20130314/text-equiv-all#text-equiv-all-situation-b-shorttext> *AND* a
> long description from the list of Long text alternative techniques for
> Situation B
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2013/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20130314/text-equiv-all#text-equiv-all-situation-b-longtext>:
>
I actually missed the subtle wording distinction when I went to make my
edits. But I'm not sure about this, I think the word "following" is
important. For now, this re-wording isn't in place, but can be put in if
there's momentum around it.

Michael
>
>
> /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 Mar 15, 2013, at 1:22 PM, Loretta Guarino Reid
> <lorettaguarino@google.com <mailto:lorettaguarino@google.com>> wrote:
>
>> Michael,
>>
>> I don't understand the strategy for which words to mark in bold in
>> the technique list labels. Especially the last one, where we
>> highlight "not required".
>>
>> While we are sorting the technique lists, should we also sort the
>> Failures so that they are in numeric order?
>>
>> The technique list paragraphs aren't indented in the Quick Ref, which
>> is a little confusing. It almost makes the SItuations look like
>> subcases of the lists, instead of vice versa. Is there a way to
>> control that formatting?
>>
>> I tried playing around with different Quickref configurations, and I
>> think things work ok. Fortunately, it isn't possible to turn off
>> general techniques, so the only list that can ever be empty is the
>> last one (Techniques to indicate that text alternatives are *not
>> required* for Situation F). That may be a little confusing, but I
>> would only expect it to be used by experts.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org
>> <mailto:cooper@w3.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     I've committed the restructuring of Understanding SC 1.1.1:
>>
>>     http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2013/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20130314/text-equiv-all
>>
>>     This implements the approved proposal:
>>
>>     http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/index.php?title=Restructuring_Understanding_1.1.1&oldid=2022
>>     <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/index.php?title=Restructuring_Understanding_1.1.1&oldid=2022>
>>
>>     I'd like review of this to help me check that I did it right and
>>     that it still looks as we hoped it would, now that it's in
>>     context of the live draft.
>>
>>     One note, the lists of techniques for short text alternatives,
>>     long text alternatives, etc. are not in explicit sub-sections
>>     with headers. The XML format didn't allow any further levels of
>>     section nesting and it would be a big change to enable that - I
>>     can if it's deemed crucial. For now, the list of techniques just
>>     have a paragraph serving as a header before the list. The
>>     references go to that paragraph, and the list immediately follows.
>>
>>     You may also want to take a look at the updated Quickref that
>>     also picks up this change:
>>
>>     http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/20130314/
>>
>>     In there, it would be particularly helpful to turn on and off
>>     some of the technology filters (under "Customize this Quick
>>     Reference") to make sure everything stays sane.
>>
>>     Michael
>>     -- 
>>
>>     Michael Cooper
>>     Web Accessibility Specialist
>>     World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
>>     E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org>
>>     Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>
>>
>>
>

-- 

Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org>
Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>