W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2017

Re: Is Java Web Start covered by WCAG?

From: Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 00:52:51 +0200
Cc: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, "w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
Message-Id: <0F9CBE32-0066-4A15-8302-3FB4A177CBAE@umd.edu>
To: Jason J White <jjwhite@ets.org>
alistair

good definitions  and good analysis

A question and a thought 

Is the working group (called Web Content  … working group)  chartered now to work on non-web content?   if so this is news.  If not then you are restricted to Web Content


(the sentence that they MAY apply elsewhere seems fair — but it should also say that “ However, since these guidelines make the assumption that there is an accessible user agent included they are NOT SUFFICENT by themselves to be used for anything other than Web Content by themselves. 

g


Gregg C Vanderheiden
greggvan@umd.edu




-       A traditional website rendered in the browser of a mobile device.

-       A ‘Progressive Web App’ (an umbrella term for various recent technologies including offline stuff) that opens in the browser, but is optimised for mobile devices and it may not show the browser chrome.

-       A native app wrapper around an HTML based app, often using a framework to minimise the differences between iOS and Android. These are not opened in the browser but it may use the same (or very similar) rendering engine.

-       A native app that loads HTML views, not in the browser but it may use the same (or very similar) rendering engine. These may or may not load from the internet.

If it loads using http:// then it is a browser not web content. 

-       A native app with nothing to do with the internet or web (W3C) technologies.
 




> On Apr 28, 2017, at 7:38 PM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote:
> 
>  
>   <>
> From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>] 
> Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 1:30 PM
> 
> Well, most connections are now over httpS, and behind the scenes that is becoming http2, so it doesn't work from that point of view.
> [Jason] I agree, and it obviously depends on whether you treat HTTP as including all of the variants (whether TLS is used or not, whether it’s HTTP 1.1 or HTTP 2, etc.).
>  
> I'm less certain of this but i believe that a lot of video is delivered by UDP or RTSP, have you checked to see if a particular video is covered by WCAG based on the protocol it uses? 
>  
> [Jason] This is a good point. If the video is embedded in an HTML-based Web page, then whether the Web page conforms or not presumably depends on whether or not the video conforms, so it’s covered. However, if (assuming this is possible) it’s linked to rather than embedded, then it’s more of a separate resource and questions arise.
> > If we want to widen it for future versions that is another matter... but as far as clarity, the definition of web page is very clear in the standard. It says exactly what the working group  intended it to say.
>  
> And there are plenty of people who can't work out what that means anymore..
> [Jason] I agree there are issues; I agree the definition should be widened (we have an open issue on that question).
>  
> 
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
> 
> 
> Thank you for your compliance.
> 


Received on Friday, 28 April 2017 22:53:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:12 UTC