Re: Collections of web pages

Bruce writes:

> I am arguing that we make the same common sense leap for ePub and WCAG
2.2.  A typical ePub, posted online as a zip file, is a set of web pages,
full stop.


+1

An E-Pub (Electronic Publication) is a singular unit that comprises
multiple screens or views, but is traditionally thought-of as a single and
complete entity.
It traditionally also has a single table-of-contents, which I will argue
also suggests to me that a single "findable help" would be (in context)
appropriate. This is not to say that
content creators cannot *also* provide contextual help in the 'footer' of
each e-pub document if desired, only that it would not be mandated to do so.

Thoughts?

JF

On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 12:06 PM Bruce Bailey <Bailey@access-board.gov>
wrote:

> Thanks Alastair for kicking off this discussion.  CC’ing John Foliot since
> he has some strong opinions about this.  CC’ing Shawn Lauriat because he
> has articulated how our current definition of web page does not stand up to
> technical scrutiny.
>
>
>
> Forgive me, but I will remind folks that in 2006 the WG though we needed a
> new term, “web unit”.  The good old bad old days!
>
> www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/appendixA.html#webunitdef
>
>
>
> Can we agree that there is a certain amount of hand waving required with
> our current definition of web page?
>
>
>
> I agree that a typical PDF file is a web page.
>
> I agree that a PDF collection could be posted in a way that it is a set of
> web pages.  I pretty confident we can agree it is not typical.  For this
> discussion, I would really rather we not spend cycles talking about PDFs.
>
>
>
> I disagree that posting a .zip file (or similar archive of a collection)
> has any meaningful implication to our discussion of web page or set of web
> pages.  Yes, files posted online have a URI.  Not every URI is a web page!
>
>
>
> If one archives a set of web pages into a single zip file (and posts the
> zip online), it would be nonsensical to assert that the URI is now a web
> page and no longer a set of web pages.
>
>
>
> I am arguing that we make the same common sense leap for ePub and WCAG
> 2.2.  A typical ePub, posted online as a zip file, is a set of web pages,
> full stop.
>
>
>
> I admit that my argument is not in the shape of good formal logic.  I
> would ask that anyone who disagrees (than an ePub is a set of web pages)
> make a recommendation to how our definition of web page and set of web page
> might be tweaked (so that they would agree that an ePub meets their
> modified definition for set of web pages).
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 8, 2020 11:42 AM
> *To:* Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>; Bruce Bailey
> <Bailey@Access-Board.gov>
> *Cc:* WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Collections of web pages
>
>
>
> Hi Andrew, Bruce & everyone,
>
>
>
> During the discussion of two criteria (at least), the concept of “set of
> web pages” came up as a key point.
>
>
>
>    - Findable help: Including ‘set of web pages’ helps to scope-out the
>    very simple one-page websites and *PDFs* that are less likely to have
>    human contact details.
>    - Fixed reference points: It says “a web page or set of web pages" so
>    that it covers ePub and non-ePub files .
>
>
>
> Andrew mentioned that long PDFs could be considered a ‘set of web pages’,
> and that some PDFs techniques mention that.
>
>
>
> As far as I can tell from our definition for a web page
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG21%2F%23dfn-web-page-s&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7Cc6d89b46797f49213b0808d7dbd36f2d%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637219573475002609&sdata=gHYOWONUhzMRcA04Vv1eJhLF1DSlhV93bdnPX6QIfnA%3D&reserved=0>
> and set of web pages
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG21%2F%23dfn-set-of-web-pages&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7Cc6d89b46797f49213b0808d7dbd36f2d%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637219573475012600&sdata=yFqJ7fz4UUlIGWgKiP%2F3wSjXdWjAUavo%2F3lEdu%2B7xHI%3D&reserved=0>,
> all of these would be considered a ‘web page’ as they are located at a
> single URI:
>
>    - A PDF;
>    - An ePub document;
>    - A ‘single page app’, unless it adjusts the URI & browser history to
>    appear to have multiple pages.
>
>
>
> I can’t see a reference to ‘set of web pages’ in the PDF techniques
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG20-TECHS%2Fpdf%23PDF2&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7Cc6d89b46797f49213b0808d7dbd36f2d%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637219573475022599&sdata=l675wkH%2FdAOI%2BCs1gXjVqCzW%2FzcR%2FBdfolGwFJ96iNs%3D&reserved=0>,
> the closest is PDF2 but that doesn’t seem to reference the definition
> directly.
>
>
>
> Can anyone see an issue with the uses of “set of web pages” in these two
> SCs?
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> www.nomensa.com
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nomensa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7Cc6d89b46797f49213b0808d7dbd36f2d%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C637219573475032595&sdata=DG90CpyZ1cu8b9ZXKK5ZbRRWtRJ4U5d%2FHjqqhuwLuVo%3D&reserved=0>
> / @alastc
>


-- 
*​John Foliot* | Principal Accessibility Strategist | W3C AC Representative
Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good
deque.com