- From: Hans Riesebos <HRiesebos@alva-bv.nl>
- Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 09:59:49 +0100
- To: chuckop@microsoft.com, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Please read my comments in between marked with *** >>> Charles Oppermann <chuckop@microsoft.com> 04-02-99 21.00 >>> This kind of ISV activity is excellent and sorely needed in this working group. Hopefully the Working Group can get the input of accessibility aid vendors that do not have off-screen models to read information off the screen. Products such as voice-input, switch and scanning systems and learning disabled tools all need information about the document and the user interface it provides. These products cannot read information off the screen and must get the data programmatically. Some comments... << JRG 1. From a technology standpoint would you rather rely primarily on active accessibility objects for knowing about information on the screen or use something like DOM which is more a model of underlying content of what is being rendered? GG: DOM! >> Unfortunately, this question shows a lack of knowledge of what Active Accessibility provides and unnecessarily limits the scope of the technology. If I was asked that question, and didn't know better, I'd have the same exact response! Active Accessibility is not just a screen based model, current versions expose the structure of HTML documents, not just what is present on the screen. Active Accessibility is not limited to HTML, like DOM is. It's a interface to interact with the user interface as a whole. *** MSAA is just one DOM and it is screen based. Glen's response is different that what he's told me personally is separate discussions, but that's probably because of the limited scope of the question. Also, it's my position that if the vendor is willing to spend more time and special-case HTML, then more power to them! A native object model, be it DOM, Word's, Excel's, or Visio's is much richer than the generic interface provided by Active Accessibility. Often times though, native object models are not designed with the needs of accessibility aid vendors. We improved Microsoft Office 2000's various object models to provide more information to accessibility aids. << JRG 2. Would it be useful to for you to provide your own speech or Braille rendering using DOM with a synchronized visual highlighting of what you were rendering on the visual display? This would allow sighted colleagues to see where information is being spoken is coming from on the screen. GG: This would be an interesting thing to experiment with and offers promise. >> Several companies already do this with alternative input software and learning disabled products using Microsoft technologies. *** Everybody should do what he does best (e.g. IE/netscape do visual rendering, an audio browser does audio rendering) and not need to redo what others already did. << JRG 3. Do you see as one of the main weaknesses of the current DOM the lack of visual display positional rendering information? GG: Yes! >> This is not an issue with Active Accessibility and is also available in the Dynamic HTML object model. Hopefully the DOM WG will adopt it. *** rephrasing the question like this shows absurdity: JRG 3b. Do you see as one of the main weaknesses of the current DOM the lack of audio rendering information? *** visual rendering information could enrich any DOM, but so could any other specialized information. We are so visually oriented ... << JRG 4. Are there other features that would make DOM useful for your purposes? GG: None come immediately to mind. >> A feature that Glen's product doesn't currently need, but others might find useful is the ability to get a element based on a X/Y coordinate. Used for hit testing. This is vital for screen readers that use the content of the DOM - not just manipulate it for a different visual display. *** oke, we SCREEN-readers need to know coordinates. But we also need the seperation between structure, form and contents and we also need a standard. Charles Oppermann Program Manager, Accessibility and Disabilities Group, Microsoft Corporation mailto:chuckop@microsoft.com http://www.microsoft.com/enable/ "A computer on every desk and in every home, usable by everyone!" -----Original Message----- From: Jon Gunderson [mailto:jongund@staff.uiuc.edu] Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 10:43 AM To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org Subject: Discussion of DOM with Glen Gorden of Henter-Joyce My questions are marked with JRG and responses from Glen Gorden are marked with GG . Glen is a developer at Henter-Joyce. JRG: From your perspective, ideally what type of interface do you want to use to get information about a WWW document. Could you answer these following questions. JRG 1. From a technology standpoint would you rather rely primarily on active accessibility objects for knowing about information on the screen or use something like DOM which is more a model of underlying content of what is being rendered? GG: DOM! JRG 2. Would it be useful to for you to provide your own speech or Braille rendering using DOM with a synchronized visual highlighting of what you were rendering on the visual display? This would allow sighted colleagues to see where information is being spoken is coming from on the screen. GG: This would be an interesting thing to experiment with and offers promise. JRG 3. Do you see as one of the main weaknesses of the current DOM the lack of visual display positional rendering information? GG: Yes! JRG 4. Are there other features that would make DOM useful for your purposes? GG: None come immediately to mind. End of quesitons and answers. Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign 1207 S. Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 Voice: 217-244-5870 Fax: 217-333-0248 E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
Received on Friday, 5 February 1999 03:58:20 UTC