- From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:24:19 -0600
- To: pjenkins@us.ibm.com, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Phil, Checkpoint 2.1 can be satisfied through providing access to all content through the built-in user interface or through an API (DOM). It is the intention that all information be available through the DOM or some other interface for non-HTML or non-XML documents. It was not the intention to have all the content of a resource available through the user interface, since information on element attributes like class or id are not really useful to most users and do not improve accessibility. The guidelines may need to be clearer what content needs to be available through the user interface. As to whether having a source view mode would satisfy this checkpoint is an interesting question. My first impression is that it seems to solve the checkpoint in a legal perspective, but it doesn't seem to quite honor the spirit of the checkpoint in making all content accessible in a usable way. I'll take this back to the group. Thank you for your comments. They only help make a better document. Jon At 08:36 AM 3/23/00 -0600, pjenkins@us.ibm.com wrote: > > >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 > Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services College of Applied Life Studies University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign 1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL 61820 Voice: (217) 244-5870 Fax: (217) 333-0248 E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
Received on Thursday, 23 March 2000 16:24:32 UTC