- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 15:45:56 -0400
- To: "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>
- Cc: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAdDpDaUfJDDkivesRFcg1QBg6H6GYSq5w7JYamxHANFnHYFbw@mail.gmail.com>
The link in the CFC is going the the wrong SC. It is for Change of Content not Purpose of controls. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#purpose-of-controls It should be https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#change-of-content I think we have to throw this CFC thread out and reissue it. It has caused terrible confusion. Cheers, David MacDonald *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* Tel: 613.235.4902 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 Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:25 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote: > I seems that running this CFC definition when it is disassociated from the > SC to which it applies has caused confusion. > > > > @jonathanThe definition seems to allow for using the speech API in a > browser to speak something. This type of “announcement” may work for some > users but doesn’t seem like a solution that works for different types of > users with disabilities. A programmatic notification should be something > that could be converted into different formats – speech, braille, pop-up, > vibration, etc. If I am misunderstanding then I’d be happy to change my > vote. > > This SC is all about helping those screen reader users. It has been that > from the beginning. It's a narrow and important requirement > and it was approved on that basis > . > The main way of meeting it is using aria-live. I'm kind of surprised > we're talking about widening the SC like this at this late date. > > Widening > it to other types of notifications would be a real change to it and how > would that be worded? > > > @Steve > What is needed is a programmatic association given to the new content. > > t > hat's in the first bullet. > > - There is a programmatically determined relationship between the new > content and the control that triggers it; > > > > Cheers, > David MacDonald > > > > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* > > Tel: 613.235.4902 <(613)%20235-4902> > > 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 Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Repsher, Stephen J < > stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote: > >> -1 >> >> I agree with Jonathon, and would add that his point is enforced by saying >> “announced”, which is biased towards certain users. It also uses >> “notification” in the definition which is a practice we should avoid. >> >> >> >> Ultimately, I think the real solution here is to reword the SC to not use >> such a term. “Programmatic notification” implies (and the definition >> doesn’t help) that content beyond the “change of content” is needed, but >> that is not the case. What is needed is a programmatic association given >> to the new content. >> >> >> >> I also find the shopping cart example confusing because it seems like >> that is exempt by being the result of a user action. >> >> >> >> I’m sorry I missed reviewing this in detail on the survey. This all >> needs further discussion in my opinion. >> >> >> >> Steve >> >> >> >> *From:* Jonathan Avila [mailto:jon.avila@levelaccess.com] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 03, 2017 1:25 PM >> *To:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> *Subject:* RE: CFC - Proposed definition for 'Programatic Notification' >> >> >> >> -1. The definition seems to allow for using the speech API in a browser >> to speak something. This type of “announcement” may work for some users >> but doesn’t seem like a solution that works for different types of users >> with disabilities. A programmatic notification should be something that >> could be converted into different formats – speech, braille, pop-up, >> vibration, etc. If I am misunderstanding then I’d be happy to change my >> vote. >> >> >> >> Jonathan >> >> >> >> *From:* Joshue O Connor [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie <josh@interaccess.ie>] >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 3, 2017 1:06 PM >> *To:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> *Subject:* CFC - Proposed definition for 'Programatic Notification' >> >> >> >> Call For Consensus — ends Friday October 6th at 1:00pm Boston time. >> >> >> >> The Working Group has a new proposed definition of "Programmatic >> Notification" as found in the Change of Content SC. >> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#purpose-of-controls >> >> The DFN text is: >> >> <dfn> >> Programmatic notification. >> >> Notification set by the content which can be announced to the user >> without virtual or actual focus, using methods that are supported by user >> agents, including assistive technologies. >> >> Example: a screen reader announces to a user that their shopping cart has >> been updated after they select an item for purchase. >> </dfn> >> >> And can be viewed here: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/ >> commit/b5c68e17f82feb0cdbbafc273f245b136a7445c4 >> >> >> >> This was discussed on todays call: https://www.w3.org/2017/10/03- >> ag-minutes.html#item09 >> >> This definition was previously missing from WCAG 2.1 and the proposal is >> to add it. >> >> >> >> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not >> been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not >> being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before >> the CfC deadline. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> -- >> Joshue O Connor >> Director *| InterAccess.ie * >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 3 October 2017 19:46:53 UTC