Re: Proposed definitions for content, document object, etc.

Denis Anson wrote:
> 
> Ian,
> 
> When I use the term "content," I mean the "information" in the page.

We don't have a definition of "information" in the document. It's
subsumed
by "content" as I understand.

> Specifically, what the author of the page hoped to convey to the reader of
> the page.  Some of that information may be in the form of text, some in the
> form of picture, and some in the form of layout.
> 
> It will always be impossible for the browser to "know" what the author
> intended, but our goal is to make that intended information available to the
> user with a disability.  It may well be that the author *intended* some of
> the text to be invisible, at some stages of viewing of the page.  The AT
> must have some way of knowing this, and presenting the information as it is
> appropriate.

It's much easier to work with a specification than with the author's
intention.
 
> Doing a "page dump" (the electronic equivalent of a brain dump) seldom
> conveys the intention of the author.  You can't just pile all of the
> available information on the user, and expect them to sort it out.  That's
> why we have parsing!
> 
> Denis
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ian@w3.org [mailto:ian@w3.org]On Behalf Of Ian Jacobs
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 10:49 AM
> To: Denis Anson
> Cc: Hans Riesebos; w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed definitions for content, document object, etc.
> 
> Denis Anson wrote:
> >
> > Further,  I think that the intent of 2.1 is that the user agent make
> > available to the user, either natively or through AT, the content of the
> > page.
> 
> The intent of 2.1 is being debated. I believe that it currently reads
> as you say, but that we are going to remove the "or through an API"
> part.
> 
> What do you mean be "content of the page"? Please refer to the
> definition
> of content proposed [1] and see if that meets your expectations.
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000AprJun/0132.html
> 
> > A user agent is basically a parsing and rendering agent, and in the case
> of
> > AT, it is primarily a parsing agent, since the AT will do most of the
> > rendering.  If source view were to meet the demands of 2.1, a user agent
> > would be freed of the need even to parse the code into understandable
> > chunks.  The agent would just do its thing with no attention to access,
> and
> > pass the raw code on to the AT, which would then be expected to perform
> the
> > entire task that the host agent is supposed to do.
> >
> > Denis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Hans Riesebos
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 6:17 AM
> > To: ij@w3.org
> > Cc: <
> > Subject: Re: Proposed definitions for content, document object, etc.
> >
> > Some small remarks <Hans>between these tags</Hans>
> >
> > >>> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> 04/18/00 10:54PM >>>
> >
> > 6) Source view
> >
> >    <BLOCKQUOTE>
> >    A source view renders all or part of the document
> >    object in a way that reveals the document object
> >    model. Often, a source view presents the document
> >    object using the syntax of the source markup
> >    languages.
> >    </BLOCKQUOTE>
> >
> > <Hans>
> > As I understand, the "source" is unparsed and therefore cannot reveal the
> > document object in any way. Speaking of document object itself is false.
> If
> > only the source was already parsed (contradiction in terms), a source view
> > might (minimally) satisfy checkpoint 2.1, because in effect it would have
> > become a document object view.
> > </Hans>
> >
> > Hans Riesebos
> > ALVA BV, The Netherlands
> > HRiesebos@alva-bv.nl
> 
> --
> Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
> Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2000 12:50:26 UTC