- From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 13:53:58 -0500
- To: David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com>
- Cc: Kathy Wahlbin <kathy@interactiveaccessibility.com>, "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKdCpxxDEqV+iaSKA8BG3Hw+mAG4=oWaZeAO8_jDtRM2odD-NQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi David, I don't understand your question, sorry. JF On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 1:16 PM, David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com> wrote: > hmmm... > > What do you think WCAG 2.0 requires? > > Cheers, > David MacDonald > > > > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* > Mobile: 613.806.9005 <(613)%20806-9005> > > LinkedIn > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> > > twitter.com/davidmacd > > GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> > > www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> > > > > * Adapting the web to all users* > * Including those with disabilities* > > If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy > <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> > > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Kathy Wahlbin <kathy@ > interactiveaccessibility.com> wrote: > >> I agree with John. We should not say that they have to have it working >> on one mobile technology. >> >> >> >> This is also not an SC. We are proposing adding clarification language >> to the Understanding Requirement 2" just before the Notes at the end of the >> section. https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html# >> uc-conformance-requirements-head to clarify that different viewport >> sizes also need to conform to WCAG SC. >> >> >> >> Kathy >> >> >> >> *From:* John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, July 14, 2017 1:47 PM >> *To:* David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com> >> *Cc:* White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> >> *Subject:* Re: Moving Issues 62, 63, 71 to the conformance section >> >> >> >> Hi David, >> >> >> >> > If they can demonstrate the site working on one mobile technology stack >> that should be sufficient. >> >> >> >> I'm sorry, I have to *strongly *disagree with that. The W3C has a >> long-standing policy of two independent implementations, and I would expect >> we maintain that minimum requirement going forward. >> >> >> >> I cannot support a SC that is targeted towards addressing an issue (or >> issues) with a specific piece of hardware or software (or platform), and if >> we cannot demonstrate that the requirement can be achieved on more than one >> platform, then we cannot make it a SC Requirement today (hard as that may >> be to accept). As somebody once noted >> <http://www.davidmacd.com/blog/what-are-WCAG-success-criteria.html#p7>: >> >> Success Criteria are technology neutral >> >> >> >> JF >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 11:57 AM, David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Try as I might, I've not gotten VoiceOver to work on my Samsung Galaxy >> yet, and I don't think I ever will... >> >> >> >> Yes it is shorthand, however, I don't think we can require developers to >> support every environment. Especially buggy environments ... (such as >> Talkback/Android) >> >> >> >> If they can demonstrate the site working on one mobile technology stack >> that should be sufficient. >> >> >> Cheers, >> David MacDonald >> >> >> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> >> Mobile: 613.806.9005 <(613)%20806-9005> >> >> LinkedIn >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >> >> twitter.com/davidmacd >> >> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >> >> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> >> >> >> >> * Adapting the web to all users* >> >> * Including those with disabilities* >> >> >> >> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:37 PM, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com> >> wrote: >> >> As an aside... >> >> >> >> > The original intention of the SC is to require VoiceOver compatibility >> for mobile views >> >> >> >> Try as I might, I've not gotten VoiceOver to work on my Samsung Galaxy >> yet, and I don't think I ever will... >> >> >> >> (I realize that this was more "shorthand" than anything else, but we also >> need to be mindful that we are looking for functional outcomes, and not SC >> that address software shortcomings with specific tools - which I know David >> knows. đ) >> >> >> >> JF >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:04 PM, David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Jason >> >> >> >> The original intention of the SC is to require VoiceOver compatibility >> for mobile views, especially inaccessible hamburger menus. Personally, I'd >> like to simply see a qualification to WCAG 2.0 or 2.1 Conformance that a >> page includes changes caused by breakpoints. >> >> >> >> Your wording requires ALL AT to be tested and we found that to be a >> limitless scope of every AT available in the Apple store. We could narrow >> the scope by limiting the AT the way we did in the SC proposals to >> "platform assistive technology that remaps touch gestures". This is really >> the crux of the problem as we saw it on the task force. >> >> >> >> *** >> >> If (1) the content includes features that adapt the presentation or >> functionality for specific hardware or software environments (e.g., as >> rendered on devices with different screen sizes), and (2) a different >> platform assistive technology that remaps touch gestures is used on those >> 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 know its a mouthful but if its accurate we can do a plain language pass >> later. >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> David MacDonald >> >> >> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> >> Mobile: 613.806.9005 <(613)%20806-9005> >> >> LinkedIn >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >> >> twitter.com/davidmacd >> >> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >> >> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> >> >> >> >> * Adapting the web to all users* >> >> * Including those with disabilities* >> >> >> >> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 4:46 PM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote: >> >> This is interesting. I donât think screen size is the right concept to >> use for purposes of of the clarification that we need. Also, this proposal >> doesnât actually clarify the application of the âaccessibility-supportedâ >> requirement by asserting the relevant set of user agents and assistive >> technologies that need to be compatible with the ways of using technologies >> relied on to meet the success criteria. I appreciate its simplicity, >> however. >> >> >> >> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david@can-adapt.com] >> *Sent:* Thursday, July 13, 2017 4:39 PM >> *To:* White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> >> *Cc:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> *Subject:* Re: Moving Issues 62, 63, 71 to the conformance section >> >> >> >> Here's another option which might be easier: >> >> >> >> *** >> >> >> >> "If components change form based on screen size, they remain >> programmatically determinable and keyboard operable." >> >> >> >> *** >> >> >> >> It would be placed after the last paragraph in the section "Understanding >> Requirement 2" just before the Notes at the end of the section. >> https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conforma >> nce.html#uc-conformance-requirements-head >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FUNDERSTANDING-WCAG20%2Fconformance.html%23uc-conformance-requirements-head&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc5e18b0d103d4893abe408d4ca2f3ddf%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636355751636405902&sdata=OzSa6RsINaMaOkGRz5hP6NJHqSU8BoO86HE7OGWPrVw%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> Cheers, >> David MacDonald >> >> >> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> >> Mobile: 613.806.9005 <(613)%20806-9005> >> >> LinkedIn >> >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdavidmacdonald100&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc5e18b0d103d4893abe408d4ca2f3ddf%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636355751636405902&sdata=EB3oYNzfR2hkc1qw6IbuaCsDcEc8ZU06qljcnuXQQAo%3D&reserved=0> >> >> twitter.com/davidmacd >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc5e18b0d103d4893abe408d4ca2f3ddf%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636355751636405902&sdata=QtuGL8qoBb92JkUa87O%2Bt6l0JmOqZxrzu5lI4GuGy5M%3D&reserved=0> >> >> GitHub >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FDavidMacDonald&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc5e18b0d103d4893abe408d4ca2f3ddf%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636355751636405902&sdata=vyZLBGm1BRgreiXBLdYxV4z%2Bnz32zcW9yZ8te9QQCsI%3D&reserved=0> >> >> www.Can-Adapt.com >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.can-adapt.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc5e18b0d103d4893abe408d4ca2f3ddf%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636355751636405902&sdata=uSTGQHJwALkXIBDE0NfG%2BrfFzN9pAH4kXR5YNYXnwH0%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> * Adapting the web to all users* >> >> * Including those with disabilities* >> >> >> >> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidmacd.com%2Fdisclaimer.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc5e18b0d103d4893abe408d4ca2f3ddf%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636355751636405902&sdata=arDC0ucVLw4b1n%2BnUUjj4ZfdTTpk3XOuENhWpddbRPA%3D&reserved=0> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:50 PM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote: >> >> Thanks, David â see further comments below. >> >> >> >> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david@can-adapt.com] >> >> I like your second condition, adding an "AND" for different AT in those >> environments. >> >> >> >> Regarding the first condition, Gregg expressed concern regarding using >> broad strokes for the customized view. He suggested we limit it to "size". >> He was nervous that there might be customized delivery of content such >> information spoken in a car etc, that by its very nature could not meet the >> conformance language and inhibit adoption of the standard. >> >> *[Jason] I would like to see good examples of this that would meet both >> of my conditions and which would raise difficulties.* >> >> >> >> So if I was to take your proposal and adjust it to size, it would look >> something like this. >> >> >> >> If (1) the content includes features that adapt its presentation or >> functionality based on screen sizes in specific hardware or software >> environments, 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 adaptations >> are provided. >> >> >> >> However, arguing against myself, your proposal does limit the scope to >> environments with different AT. If there is no AT for that environment, >> then maybe your language is OK. >> >> *[Jason] Yes, Iâm in favor of mentioning screen size, if at all, only as >> an example. Both of the conditions do need to be met for the proposal to >> apply, and it only clarifies (at most, expands) the nature of the >> compatibility guarantee.* >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> 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. >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> John Foliot >> >> Principal Accessibility Strategist >> >> Deque Systems Inc. >> >> john.foliot@deque.com >> >> >> >> Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion >> > > -- John Foliot Principal Accessibility Strategist Deque Systems Inc. john.foliot@deque.com Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion
Received on Friday, 14 July 2017 18:54:28 UTC