RE: More follow-up from the UA discussion today

That was a near head-exploding conversation. Huge issues. I think that
embedded objects (Flash, media players, etc) are without question UAs. Their
interaction with the user is a black hole to the 'base' user agent. 

Agree that there is considerable overlap with WCAG. But, feel there are
still fuzzy areas. It may be possible to define these areas enough to create
'rules' that make an application a user agent. 

Barring rules, we may need guidelines to cover rich internet applications
such that those (yet to be determined) areas NOT covered by WCAG fall into
UAAG space. For example...RIA's must update the DOM, must provide explicit
keyboard/pointer commands to the user to interact with the web-application.
I am sure there are others. 

Simon's point about 'who' controls/facilitates user interaction is
important. Henny's link about chromeless
<http://labs.mozilla.com/2009/01/design-review-and-windowless-browsing/>
user agents is also something to consider...it may provide some insight as
we attempt to set 'rules' about what is a user agent and what is not.

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Jan Richards
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 3:12 PM
To: Markku Hakkinen
Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Subject: Re: More follow-up from the UA discussion today

I'm also percolating the issues here. Some of my thoughts:

- some RIAs definitely act like UAs, but WCAG2 does already apply.

- applying UAAG2 to something like my example of the Flash implemented 
video player seems to yield a lot of inapplicable success criteria

- maybe unless we find compelling gaps in WCAG2's coverage, we should 
just put in a note emphasizing that "RIA/UA type applications exist and 
that they must meet WCAG2, in part so that the host UAs can pass 
accessibility information on through their DOMs and platform 
accessibility architectures".

Cheers,
Jan







Markku Hakkinen wrote:
> I found the conversation excellent, though at the same time somewhat 
> frustrating in terms of the difficulty of the problem.   These thoughts 
> were percolating as we wound up the call:
> 
> A user agent provides a user interaction framework for Web content. 
> 
> A user agent may be a host to other user agents, with the expectation 
> that the hosted UAs also conform to and do not conflict with the hosting 
> UA's or host platform's (OS) accessibility features.
> 
> A user agent may be hosted by other applications that are not UAs; in 
> this case the UA's accessibility features must conform to and not 
> conflict with the hosting application and platform (OS) accessibility 
> features.  For example, a Web browser component contained within a 
> desktop application used to display help information.
> 
> Some rich internet applications, hosted by UAs, blur the line between 
> user agent and Web content. We might call this a hybrid RIA/UA. The 
> hosted RIA/UA may provide their own user interface handling but must do 
> so in accordance with both WCAG and UAAG. The RIA/UA must support 
> accessibility through integration with the host UA's DOM and/or via 
> direct support for the host platform's accessibility architecture.
> 
> mark
> 
> 

-- 
Jan Richards, M.Sc.
User Interface Design Lead
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
Faculty of Information (i-school)
University of Toronto

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896

Received on Friday, 6 March 2009 02:22:06 UTC