- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:08:16 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
"M. Hakkinen" wrote: > > Hello, > > Sorry for the late arrival of the following. > > -------- > > I have reviewed the guidelines and find it an excellent effort to identify > and determine techniques that can be used to make user agents accessible to > all. The challenge here is to create a document that will actually be used > and followed by UA implementers, and in the end result in off the shelf/net > products that will conform to the guidelines. > > As a member of a commercial entity that seeks to remain viable and > profitable by selling innovative web access technologies, it will clearly be > to my firm's advantage in the marketplace to seek the stamp of conformance > for its products. However, with the bias in the document toward > desktop/traditional OS platforms, and with much of my energy devoted to > developing UAs that are beyond the desktop, I see this document as only a > starting point in the definition of what makes UAs accessible, whatever form > they take. I clearly see in the near term a variety new devices that will > offer significant accessibility benefits in given contexts, but will have > difficulty being conformant. Will the lack of a conformance stamp impact > the ability of a such a device to be marketed? Perhaps in government > acquisitions which seek to purchase only conformant products, yes. In the > general marketplace, unlikely. > > The guidelines can only look so far ahead, and would never be completed if > all potential UA configurations were considered. WAI needs to continue > onward with this first step, and draw from the groups engaged in mobile > access, interactive television, "net appliances", etc. > > On to specific comments: > > SECTION 1.5 - Supporting a multi-lingual UA results in instances where > "non-standard" APIs may be needed to communicate with a synthesizer for a > given language. For example, there are many synthesizers that do not have a > MS-Windows SAPI compliant interface. > > In an audio browser, it would be desirable to review recently presented > messages (message repeat). This is important for announcements of events > that may have been missed or not understood the first time by the listener. > > SECTION 2.3 - When switching synthesizer based upon natural languages, the > UA may incur significant processing delays that can hinder understanding > (e.g.., "The greeting 'Good Day' is expressed as <span lang="fi">Hyvää > Päivä</span> in Finnish, <span lang="fr">Bonjour</span> in French, ..."). > Further, announcements of language switching can interfere with the > presentation. The user should be able configure whether or not language > switching is active, and specify whether announcements indicating the switch > are to be presented. > > SECTION 2.7 - I would extend this and allow the user to request the name of > the object, as that in some cases may help identify its purpose. > > SECTION 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 - I have some challenges here, in that it will be > difficult in some contexts to know what elements on a page may fall into > these categories. Animations may be achieved by GIF, DHTML, SMIL 2.0, > player plug-ins, applets, etc. I have created examples of "animated banner > ads" that look visually the same, but are implemented by different > "technologies". Does my UA have to allow users to select which type of item > they wish to turn off? What are the unintended consequences? > > SECTION 4.11 - Some audio codecs may not support speed up and slow down, > something that is out of the control of the player. A UA may therefore be > out of conformance through no fault of its own. Further, when a live stream > is presented, speed up is obviously not permitted and slowdown presents > other problems. This needs to be clarified. > > SECTION 4.16 - It is sometimes the case that a synthesizer will only support > one gender. The UA may provide support for gender switching, but may not > meet this checkpoint because of limitations in a user selected synthesizer. > This may be particularly true as we address the non-english speaking > synthesizers. This sections should clarify that the UA should allow > switching of these synthesizer characteristics, IF supported in the > synthesizer selected by the user. > > SECTION 5.6 - It is likely that a number of devices will not be able to meet > this priority 1. As I interpret the document, I assume that I can strike > this Priority 1 as "Not Applicable". I'd like to see this more clearly > stated. > > SECTION 7.7 AND 7.8 - Familiar elements can be expanded to include the > "class" attribute. For example, if an author uses: > <DIV CLASS="abstract"> > and > <DIV CLASS="author-bio"> > > to signify abstracts and biographical information in a page of publication > descriptions, the user should be able to: > > 1. Identify a list of elements with classes and what those classes are > 2. Navigate to those elements determined by a class name. > > SECTION 8.3 - Assuming (unfortunately) that a large body of content lacks > header elements, or uses headers in a non-intuitive fashion by relying on > styling to achieve "headers", it is unlikely in many cases that a meaningful > table of contents can be constructed. There may be value to allowing > "creative" interpretation by the UA of document elements to create this > view, and certainly to allow users the option to alter what elements are > displayed. > > SECTION 10.3 - change wording: "For self-voicing browsers, allow the user to > modify what voice commands activate > functionalities". This should read: "For voice-activated browsers, ..." > > GENERAL COMMENT: > > Conformance can be highly dependent upon the content being rendered. A UA > vendor may make significant efforts to support guidelines, and verify > through test cases using diverse web content that conformance is robust. > However, with the mass of poorly constructed legacy content, and > "innovations" in web design that move faster than any standards body, what > recourse is there for a UA developer when challenged by a user that a site > or content is not accessible? > > My suggested policy (and one that I would certainly include in any fine > print regarding conformance), is that the content is only certified > accessible using my UA IF the content being rendered meets the WAI Content > Authoring Guidelines. Of course my UA will do the best it can with > inaccessible content, but I cannot guarantee accessibility to all content. > Can this be expressed clearly in the Guidelines where conformance is > discussed? > > --- > Markku T. Hakkinen - The Productivity Works, Inc. > Trenton, New Jersey USA - +1 609 984 8044 > hakkinen@prodworks.com - http://www.prodworks.com -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Thursday, 2 December 1999 15:10:01 UTC