- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 01:48:12 -0400
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- CC: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > > The piece that is missing is easy access to marked-up semantics. For example, > the fact that something has been marked as an address, or a chapter title, or > a summary or abstract. There may be no equivalence, there is just information > that can be used. "Easy access to marked-up semantics" is the rest of the guidelines, in my opinion. I don't think that should be a checkpoint on its own. - Ian > All data is data, but some data as expressed is intended to be meaningful to > the reader (the role of an element, the content of an alternative, etc) and > some is intended to be processable by a machine (the URI from which an > equivalent can be fetched, the RDF property that signifies a role according > to a machine-interpreted scheme, etc.) > > cheers > > Charles McCN > > On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Ian Jacobs wrote: > > Al Gilman wrote: > > > > At 10:18 PM 2000-04-25 -0400, Ian Jacobs wrote: > > > Proposal: > > > > > > 1) Leave 2.1 checkpoint text the same. > > > ("Make available all content, including equivalent > > > alternatives for content.") > > > 2) Require that for content known by specification to > > > be for users (including information in style sheets), > > > that a document source view does not suffice. > > > [snip] > > "What is for display" is view-specific. Not document-information-generic. > > > > "What is for the user" is not a valid concept in the Universal Access > > architecture. It is a residue of "view chauvenism;" someone's assumption > > as to what view the user is using. All the properties are informative, and > > may be exposed in the over-the-wire encoding as text or (where available) > > in a friendlier transform of that encoding. > > Similarly, in another email [1] you write: > > "There is no fundamental semantic difference between what is > called data vs. metadata. They both play the same role as > bearers of information Semantically, it is all just > one class of data. This is a little-understood fact of > information science." > > I think that we should focus on one particular view of > the data: the author's view of what pieces of content are > equivalent. The author marks up these pieces in a way that > allows user agents to recognize the pieces as equivalent. I think > the Working Group wants those equivalents to be easily > interchangeable or reachable in the same view. > > Proposal (both P1): > > 2.1.a Provide easy access to all equivalents. > > The equivalents could be rendered in the same viewport, through > tool tips, by querying selected elements for attribute values, > etc. A document source view would not meet this requirement since > it would not be easy for most users. I don't think that it should > be a requirement that all equivalents be rendered in the same > viewport since that may not help some users, and some users may > want more than one of the equivalents rendered at a given moment. > Again, it's understood here that an "equivalent" is one that > the user agent can recognize. It's also understood that this > means "access through the UI" (which will be stated elsewhere). > > 2.1.b Provide access to all content. > > A document source view would meet this requirement, though > a structured navigation view would be better. All content > need not be available in one view (though that's the easiest to > do). All content need not be available in every view. > > Am I missing any important pieces? > > - Ian > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000AprJun/0210.html > -- > Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs > Tel: +1 831 457-2842 > Cell: +1 917 450-8783 > > > -- > Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI > Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053 > Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001, Australia -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Thursday, 27 April 2000 01:48:36 UTC