- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:16:35 -0500
- To: Denis Anson <danson@miseri.edu>
- CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Denis Anson wrote: > > Some comments on the current draft, in preparation for the meeting. Hi Denis, Thank you for these comments (most of which we addressed at the 15 March teleconf [1]). Some comments preceded by IJ: below. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0427 > Abstract: > By following these guidelines, developers will create more usable > software for all Web users. [DA: Actually, only for users of the browser > in question. Web authoring guidelines improve access for anyone who > accesses a page, but UA guidelines only help those using a specific user > agent. What we really mean is that following the guidelines will > improve access for all uses of the user agent, including those with > disabilities.] IJ: I disagree with your interpretation (though I take note of it). Our intention is to say: "Accessible design is good design, so if you meet these requirements, you will also benefit a larger audience than just users with disabilities." > In Section 1.1: > > . UAAG 1.0 includes several repair requirements (e.g., checkpoints > checkpoint 2.7 and checkpoint 2.10) for cases where content does not > conform to WCAG 1.0. Furthermore, some requirements in this document > support authoring practices that may be widely deployed but that are > discouraged because they cause accessibility or usability problems > (e.g., some uses of HTML frames).[DA: This seems to be saying that this > document is supporting practices that cause access problems! Surely > that isn't what we mean.] New text: "Furthermore, this document includes some requirements to address certain widespread authoring practices that are discouraged because they may cause accessibility or usability problems (e.g., some uses of HTML frames)." > Guideline 1: > > People who cannot or do not use a mouse have to be able to operate the > user interface with the keyboard, through voice input, a head wand, > touch screen, or other device. [DA: In this context, a head-wand is a > means of accessing the keyboard, and a touch screen is generally a mouse > emulator, so these examples are actually just restating mouse and > keyboard. Why not consider input methods there that do not rely on > standard mouse and keyboard presence: such as Morse Code or > single-switch scanning. ] IJ: The introduction ("Known limitations of this document") explains that this document "only includes requirements for keyboard, pointing device, and voice input modalities. > Checkpoints 1.1 through 1.3 > > [DA: As written, this seems to say that you can choose to implement > mouse only, keyboard only, or voice input only interfaces, and claim > such conformance. I understood us to intend that you must provide > keyboard interface, and may provide mouse and voice interfaces. IJ: Yes, that's true. Refer to recent proposal on this topic: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0452.html > Even > devices that do not have keyboards should have an API that supports > keyboard control to facilitate use of AT. ] [I have snipped a bunch of comments addressed at the 15 March teleconf.] > 2.7 Allow configuration to generate repair text when the user agent > recognizes that the author has failed to provide conditional content > that was required by the format specification. If the missing > conditional content is included by URI reference, base the repair text > on the URI reference and content type. Otherwise, base the repair text > on element type information. [Priority 2] > > DA: I agree with Ian here that the information in the URI is a minimal, > but certainly not optimal repair text. This might be the minimum > implementation, but other solutions should be supported. IJ: Ok. > 2.9 Allow configuration to create the conditions under which conditional > content is rendered. [Priority 3] > Note: > > DA: I'm not sure what this means. Doesn't conditional text, by > definition, have attached conditions? Perhaps we mean that the user > agent should allow configuration to modify the conditions under which > conditional text is rendered? IJ: Refer to proposal to clarify: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2001JanMar/0453.html Thanks Denis, - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 19 March 2001 12:16:54 UTC