RE: [Editorial] Proposed text to explain that checkpoints are int erdependent

Seems reasonable. See notes below. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 5:16 PM
> To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
> Subject: [Editorial] Proposed text to explain that checkpoints are
> interdependent
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> One reviewer of the document has noted that the document is
> not designed so that the checkpoints can be read entirely
> out of context.
> 
> I think this is a very good observation. And it's true:
> the requirements of some checkpoints "apply" to others,
> the result of an attempt to reduce redundancy in the
> checkpoints.
> 
> For instance, we don't start off each checkpoint by
> saying "In a device-independent manner, allow the
> user to configure ....". We say this once (in checkpoint 1.1)
> and thereafter 1.1 "applies" to the other checkpoints.
> 
> I propose that we add a sentence or two to the beginning
> of section 2 to explain this. This text might be appropriate
> after the description of the structure of a guideline. Or it
> might be appropriate after the description of the structure
> of a checkpoint. In any case, here's the text:
> 
> <PROPOSED>
>   Note: Many checkpoints in this document are "interdependent":
>   they include requirements that have been "factored out" 
>   of other checkpoints in order to reduce the size of the 
>   document. For instance, checkpoint 1.1 requires that the 
>   user agent be fully operable through the keyboard. 
>   Consequently, checkpoint 4.1 does not need to
>   state explicitly that all input device requirements of
>   the checkpoint must be satisfied through the keyboard;
>   it does not start "Allow global configuration and
>   control through the keyboard..."
> 
New:
First-time readers are likely to benefit from paying attention to contextual
information such as guideline prose, guideline organization, checkpoint
order, checkpoint notes, and associated techniques. The checklist [??]
consisting of checkpoints themselves is expected to be a useful tool for
people with some familiarity with the document to evaluate user agent
conformance.

Old:
>   As a result of this factorization, first-time 
>   readers are likely to find the checkpoints easier to 
>   understand in context than "on their own." For instance,
>   guideline prose, guideline organization, checkpoint order, 
>   checkpoint notes, and associated techniques all provide
>   context for understanding the purpose and scope of
>   each checkpoint. The checklist is expected to be a useful
>   tool for people with some familiarity with the document 
>   to evaluate user agents for conformance.
> </PROPOSED>
> 
>  - Ian
> 
> Reference document: 23 March 2001 draft:
>   http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/WD-UAAG10-20010323/
> 
> -- 
> Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
> Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
>

Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2001 17:26:11 UTC