Re: Moving Issues 62, 63, 71 to the conformance section

> *If (1) the content includes features that enhance its presentation or
functionality in specific hardware or software environments (e.g., as
rendered on devices with different screen sizes), and (2) different user
agents or assistive technologies are in use in each of these respective
environments, then the ways in which technologies are relied upon to
satisfy the success criteria are only accessibility-supported if they are
compatible with user agents and assistive technologies in each of the
environments for which enhancements are provided.*

Ugh. I fully support Jason's principle point, but that sentence is almost
un-parsable, and will require significant editorial fine-tuning (sorry
Jason). I'm hardly the least verbose person here, and don't claim to be an
English major, but here's another crack at it:

*When content includes programed features that enhance its presentation or
functionality for specific, targeted hardware or software environments, and
those enhancements are supported by 2 or more different assistive
technologies / user agents for those specific environments;*

*Then the ways in which technologies are relied upon to satisfy the success
criteria are only accessibility-supported if they are compatible with
assistive technologies and **user agents** in each of the environments for
which enhancements are provided.*

​According to Hemingway Editor <http://www.hemingwayapp.com/>, this is
still written at a Post-Graduate level​, but I hope it does add some
clarity. I welcome others to take a stab at it as long as the main
principle that Jason has brought forward here is preserved.


JF

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:59 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david@can-adapt.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 11, 2017 3:28 PM
>
> The proposal is to sum up all of these in the conformance section by
> ensuring that the definition of a page, includes different versions of the
> page that are delivered based on the size of the screen. Here's a proposal.
>
> A paragraph would be added to the conformance section something like this:
>
> ********************
>
> The full page includes each variation of the page that is automatically
> generated by the
>
> ​content
>
>  for various screen sizes. Each of these variations (or their respective
> conforming alternate versions) needs to conform in order for the entire
> page to conform. However, if a user actively chooses a setting on the page
> that optimizes or personalizes the state of the page for accessibility
> reasons, this new state does not necessarily need to conform, because the
> conforming version can be reached by undoing the setting.
>
> ****************
>
> ​****​
>
>
> *[Jason] *I support the principle of the above, but I think we may need
> to rework the text and the focus somewhat. A clearer principle, which I
> began to articulate yesterday, would be as follows.
>
> *If (1) the content includes features that enhance its presentation or
> functionality in specific hardware or software environments (e.g., as
> rendered on devices with different screen sizes), and (2) different user
> agents or assistive technologies are in use in each of these respective
> environments, then the ways in which technologies are relied upon to
> satisfy the success criteria are only accessibility-supported if they are
> compatible with user agents and assistive technologies in each of the
> environments for which enhancements are provided.*
>
> I’m not sure whether we would then need an exception for personalization
> introduced for purposes of improved accessibility, since in those cases, it
> doesn’t seem to me that both of the above conditions would be met. Note
> that the second condition (the relevance of different UA/AT software)
> greatly reduces the scope of the situations to which the proposal would
> apply, but it isn’t confined to screen size as in David’s proposal. Also,
> my proposal would qualify the discussion of accessibility-supported ways of
> using technology either in the Conformance section or in the glossary
> definition.
>
> The above text is a rough first draft to which improvements are most
> welcome.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> 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.
> ------------------------------
>



-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion