- From: <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 08:36:58 -0600
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
After reading the user agent proposed rec guidelines [1] document and the associated techniques [2], I have a question about how to interpret the priority 1 checkpoint 2.1 Ensure that the user has access to all content ... The techniques [2] give examples about AMAYA's ability to show the attributes of an element - which is nice, but more like what I would expect from an editing tool and environment than what I would expect from a user agent that majors in rendering content. But my question is; - would the current technique of rendering the source view of the content meet this checkpoint? If not, it needs to be explicitly stated. If it would be OK, then the instances for which it would be O.K. need to be stated in the techniques. My concern is over priority 2 or 3 content from the WCAG [3]. For example, why is it a priority 1 for the browser to render the title attribute on the HR element? Sure the author and/or authoring tool went to the trouble to put a title there, but what is the benefit in this case for accessibility? Would not access to the source view meet the checkpoint? Content is defined in the glossary [4] as including comments, in addition to elements and attributes. Would the browser need a separate accessible user interface for rendering the comments? - other than the source view? More examples from the WCAG checklist need to be considered. I have listed the ones that first come to mind here for further discussion: 1.1 Object types (not to be confused with objective alternative which is P1) 2.1 Color attributes (not to be confused with high contrast requirement) 4.1 Natural language (identifying - not rendering) 4.2 ACRONYM and ABBR expansion 4.3 Primary language of document (identifying - not rendering) 5.2 Table elements and attributes (i.e., what kind of a cell is this? TH vs TD vs TFOOTER, etc.) 12.3 LEGEND for FIELDSET, OPTGROUP for SELECT, etc. 12.4 LABEL FOR vs what is it's LABEL 13.2 Metadata added as semantic information about page and site navigation I believe access to the source view would meet the checkpoint in the above cases. More easier to use accessible user interfaces are up to the user agent designer upon which they will compete. Also, the wording of the checkpoint is interesting. Is the phrase "ensure ... access to all" meant to be different than say for example, "render all"? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/PR-UAAG10-20000310/uaag10.html#gl-content-access [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10-TECHS/#content-access [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/PR-UAAG10-20000310/uaag10.html#def-content [previously posted to AU in error] Phill Jenkins http://www.ibm.com/able
Received on Thursday, 23 March 2000 09:51:12 UTC