- From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 12:47:43 -0600
- To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: WAI UA group <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
I think the conformance section needs to be conservative here. If there are no standard I/O or accessibility APIs then the user agent cannot claim conformance with this document. This sounds like a closed box situation that wendy[1] brought up earlier and I suggested that a different set of guidelines is needed in this situation. Jon [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0368.html At 01:31 PM 12/7/2000 -0500, Ian Jacobs wrote: >Hello, > >After some discussion with Charles, it would seem that people have >different interpretations of checkpoint 5.4. The question seems to >be: Do UA developers have to provide access to ATs even when there >are no standard (system) APIs for doing so? > >1) For access to content, the answer is you have to implement the > DOM, so there is no issue. > >2) For access to UI controls, checkpoint 5.4 says: > > Provide programmatic read and write access to user agent > user interface controls using standard APIs ...." > > Does this mean: > > - You must provide access using standard APIs. > - You must provide access, and you must use standard APIs > (when they exist) to do so? > >If the interpretation is the latter, then I think Wendy's question >is answered: UA developers must always use some API. (Talking with >AT developers to create a good one is, in my opinion, out of scope >for this document though a good thing to do.) > >Added as issue #457 > http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#457 > > _ Ian > > >Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > > > > On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Jon Gunderson wrote: > > > > Responses in JRG: > > > > JRG: If the developer is relying on the VM for some accessibility > > functionalities required by UAAG, the developer may only be able to claim > > conformance for certain operating systems that they can demonstrate > > actually meet the guidelines. Therefore they may not be able to claim > > conformance for every OS with a Java VM. > > CMN > > But they can claim conformance with "any conforming Java VM". > > > > Wendy > > >It was my understanding of this section that if a standard accessibility > > >API does not exist for an operating system, that the developer must > create > > >and use their own. This would cause an AT developer to learn a > different > > >API for each browser on a platform that did not have an > accessibility API. > > [and good reasons why this can be a problem] > > > > In actual fact it makes life a bit painful for the developers. > Basically, if > > there isn't an API they have to make one. If there is, they have to use it. > > So if they start working on a system without one, and they make their own, > > and then a later version of the system introduces a standard one, they > cannot > > conform for the later versions of the system until they change to it. Which > > gives them a strong incentive to work with the developers of the underlying > > OS's, but doesn't just leave a requirement as vague as "work with some > other > > folks" > > >-- >Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs >Tel: +1 831 457-2842 >Cell: +1 917 450-8783 Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services MC-574 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, 7 December 2000 13:46:35 UTC