- From: Simon Harper <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 16:21:19 +0100
- To: User Agent Working Group <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Hi there, I was actioned to look at creating rationale for each of the 4.1 (sub) checkpoints. It is my firm belief that if we cannot support a checkpoint with a rationale for following it, then it should not be a checkpoint. Further, I would also like to suggest that we back up each rational (where possible) with a citation from the scientific literature (exemplar 4.1.1) - this may also mean that there are proposed techniques within that literature which we can leverage into the techniques document. 4.1.1 Keyboard Operation: Some users do not have the ability to control mouse movements or have fine control over cursor positioning. Indeed, many users only have the option of a boolean selection switch. If keyboard (or simulated keyboard - via a scanning keyboard, say) control is not available then access may not be possible [1]. This is also the case with regard to keyboard timing and the length of delay required for execution of the keypress [2]. [1] Trewin, S. and Pain, H. A model of keyboard configuration requirements. Behaviour and Information Technology Special Issue on Assistive Technologies for People with Disabilities. 18, 1, (1999) 27--35. [2] S. Trewin. Automating accessibility: the dynamic keyboard. In Assets ’04: Proceedings of the 6th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility, pages 71–78, New York, NY, USA, 2004. ACM. 4.1.2 Documentation of Precedence of Keystroke Processing: Clear documentation prevents the invocation of functions by mistake. If multiple functionality has the same Keystroke, and the order of precedence of those keystrokes are not known, the resultant action may not be either desired or expected. In this case the user may become disoriented; this is particularly the case for older users and visually disabled users where magnification technology may mean that functions are invoked by mistake and are executed off the viewable area. 4.1.3 No Keyboard Trap: The common way to move away from an interface component, or group of components, is to mouse over a different screen area and click. If the user cannot operate a mouse (see 4.1.1) then a consistent keyboard solution is required. 4.1.4 Separate Activation: The interface often presents its options in stages (progressive disclosure) on the assumption that a user will move through stages of interaction using a pointing device; such as a mouse. However, with reference to 4.1.1, the user must be able to move through the interface by using the keyboard. This means that movement and selection must be separated to prevent unintended invocation of the functionality when moving the interface focus with the keyboard. 4.1.5 Available Keyboard Shortcuts: If keyboard shortcuts are not disclosed, both through the interface and to any assistive technology (define), the user will not be able to use the functionality supported by 4.1.1 in any consistent way. 4.1.6 Standard Text Area Conventions: Maintaining platform interface consistency of both presentation and control means that the cognitive load on a user is much reduced as different interaction paradigms are not needed for different applications. 4.1.7 User Interface Navigation: ***COMMENT*** This seems like it could be amalgamated with 4.1.6 4.1.8 Ensure Keyboard Shortcuts: Supports 4.1.1 by enabling direct keyboard access to interface components within the currently focused group. 4.1.9 Precedence of Keystroke Processing: ***COMMENT*** It seems we should look at this and 4.1.2 together - if we define a precedence why do we then need to make sure the precedence is documented unless 4.1.2 is A conformance and 4.1.9 is AA? 4.1.10 User Override of Keyboard Shortcuts: ***COMMENT*** Not sure on this one. I would say it could be seen as 4.1.2 AAA conformance just as I suggest 4.1.9 is 4.1.2 AA conformance? 4.1.11 Intergroup Navigation: ***COMMENT*** Is this not a lot like 4.1.3 in regard to navigation and selection, seems that these two could be amalgamated into something like 4.1.x Interface Navigation 4.1.12 Group Navigation: ***COMMENT*** See 4.1.11 === Seems to me that we could think of Keyboard Operation as: (1) Navigation; (2) Selection; (3) Direct-Access; and (4) Exposure & Documentation. === I'm on vacation next week with sporadic email access. Cheers Si. ==== Simon Harper University of Manchester (UK) Human Centred Web Lab: http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk My Site: http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/harper/ My Diary (iCal): http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk/diaries/SimonHarper.ics +----------------------[ NEW & INTERESTING ]--------------------------------------+ ASSETS 2008 . 13-15 Oct 2008 . http:// www.sigaccess.org/assets08 +----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------+
Received on Friday, 4 July 2008 15:21:58 UTC