Re: Comments on the UAAG (28 Jan 00 Version)

Ian Jacobs wrote:
> 
> Eric Hansen wrote:
> >
> > Date: 18 February 2000
> > To: User Agent Accessibility Guidelines List
> > From: Eric Hansen
> > Re: Comments on the User Agent Accessibility
> > Guidelines 1.0 (28 January 2000 Candidate
> > Recommendation)
> >
> > The document seems to read quite well.
> >
> > Following are a few comments. These comments
> > attempt to reconcile and harmonize this document
> > with the other documents (Web Content and Authoring
> > Tools).

I think that most of Eric's comments are editorial. He
and I discussed ones that were not. Please refer to 
proposals below.

1) For Comments 1 and 2, I propose to change checkpoint
   2.6 as suggested by Eric. Furthermore, I propose moving 
   the Note into the checkpoint itself (and not mentioning
   sychronized collated text transcripts since that will be
   covered by this note).

<PROPOSED>
2.6 Allow the user to specify that text
transcripts, collated text transcripts, captions,
and auditory descriptions be rendered at the same
time as the associated auditory and visual
presentations. Respect synchronization cues during
rendering.
</PROPOSED>

2) Comment #6: Clarify checkpoint 2.2.

   I agree with Eric that as written in the CR,
   Checkpoint 2.2 is not clear:
 
  <OLD>
"2.2 For presentations that require user
 interaction within a specified time interval, allow
the user to configure the time interval (e.g., by
allowing the user to pause and restart the
presentation, to slow it down, etc.). [Priority 1]"
</OLD>

  The checkpoint involves several pieces:
      - Presentations
      - User interaction within a time interval
      - Configuration of the time interval
      - The example of how the time interval is adjusted.

  Checkpoints 4.5 and 4.6 require user agents to allow users
  to slow, pause, stop, rewind, etc. audio, video, and
  animations. If checkpoint 2.2 is only about the user being
  able to control the rate of a presentation, 2.2 is subsumed
  by them (since cases where user interaction is required is
  a subset of all presentations). However, 2.2 talks about
  configuration and this should be interpreted to mean that
  the user configures the UA and *no longer has to pause or
  slow the presentation by hand*. In this way, 2.2 differs from
  4.5 and 4.6, and this difference needs to be clarified. Here
  is the proposed clarification:

  <PROPOSED 2.2>
     For presentations that require user input within a 
     specified time interval, allow the user to configure the
     time interval (e.g., to extend it or to cause the user agent
     to pause the presentation and await user input before proceeding).
  </PROPOSED>


3) Comment #7: Fix the introduction for Guideline 2.

   I think the following paragraph should be moved to 
   Guideline 4 (and edited accordingly) since G4 talks
   more about dynamic presentations and user interaction
   than 2.2 (notably with the proposed change above that
   2.2 is about configuration, not actions from the user).

> > "Access to content requires more than mode
> > redundancy. For dynamic presentations such as
> > synchronized multimedia presentations created with
> > SMIL 1.0 [SMIL], users with cognitive, hearing,
> > visual, and physical disabilities may not be able
> > to interact with a presentation within the time
> > delays assumed by the author. To make the
> > presentation accessible to these users, user agents
> > rendering synchronized presentations must either
> > provide access to content in a time-independent
> > manner or allow users to configure the playback
> > rate of the presentation."

4) I also think we should add Eric's proposed definitions for
   collated text transcript, transcript, audio (to distinguish
   audio presentation from audio track from sounds).

 - Ian

-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel/Fax:                     +1 212 684-1814 or 212 532-4767
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Received on Friday, 3 March 2000 15:55:26 UTC