- From: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:18:45 -0400
- To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
- Cc: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Jonathan wrote: "I tend to agree with Sailesh that I’m not sure interoperability and non-interference are captured fully with WCAG. The non-interference clause in the conformance requirements section seems to really be about technologies that are not used to claim conformance on the page. What if the technologies are used to claim conformance and they interfere?" Well put Jonathan. It does sort of suggest what is intended by that S508 paragraph in the opening email to this thread. How about adding a clause to the conformance requirement under non-interference along the lines of: "A method (or technique?) that is relied upon to meet a success criterion is not disabled or obfuscated (or made confusing) by another partly or fully implemented technique that addresses the same or other success criterion". or "The application of a method (or technique?) that is relied upon to meet a success criterion is not disabled or obfuscated (or made confusing) by another partly or fully implemented technique that addresses the same or other success criterion". Although I like the usage of the word "obfuscated", I wonder if it might be interpreted differently because "obfuscate" has a slightly different connotation in the technology and coding world. But I believe the statement captures the essence of what I intended. Thanks, Sailesh Panchang On 7/18/16, Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com> wrote: > Jonathan- you and I are ad idem! > Sailesh > > > On 7/18/16, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote: >>> Isn't this the effect of VO intercepting handwriting and gesture >>> features, >>> rather than a problem with the actual content itself? Once VO is on, >>> content/apps on webpages don't get the raw touch information anymore, >>> it's >>> all mediated via VO. >> >> I think he's talking about the rotor feature where you can set the rotor >> to >> handwritten input and draw letters on the screen for input rather than an >> actual handwriting field. >> >> Jonathan >> >> Jonathan Avila >> Chief Accessibility Officer >> SSB BART Group >> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com >> 703.637.8957 (Office) >> Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | Linkedin | Blog >> Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars! >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] >> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 10:15 AM >> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org >> Subject: Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features >> >> On 18/07/2016 15:09, Sailesh Panchang wrote: >>> Sometimes I have run into an issue that prevents use of handwriting >>> feature on an iPhone/iPad when VO is on on a Web page and sometimes >>> in an app. The new SC will cover this. >> >> Isn't this the effect of VO intercepting handwriting and gesture >> features, >> rather than a problem with the actual content itself? Once VO is on, >> content/apps on webpages don't get the raw touch information anymore, >> it's >> all mediated via VO. >> >> P >> -- >> Patrick H. Lauke >> >> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke >> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com >> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2016 14:19:16 UTC