- From: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:38:00 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
I reviewed http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/ I have not sent in formal comments to them. Deadline was 19 March. No time before/during CSUN There were a definitions and concepts I thought UAWG could use from this document. They use the same definition as WCAG but add the following explanations: " the "Web user agent" may denote a combination of several applications, extensions to such applications, operating system features, and assistive technologies. A common web user agent will therefore be a web browser with some number of plug-ins, extensions, call outs to external systems which render particular document formats, and assistive technologies." We may be able to use or incorporate the concepts or words to make our document better. The following text is taken directly from the document 4.2 Terms and Definitions [http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/#definitions] [Definition: Primary User Interface - denotes the portions of a Web user agent's user interface that are available to users without being solicited by a user interaction.] Examples of primary user interface include the location bar in common Web user agents, the "padlock" icon present in common Web user agents, or error pages that take the place of a Web page that could not be retrieved. [Definition: Secondary User Interface - denotes the portions of a Web user agent's user interface that are available to the user after they are solicited by a specific user interaction.] Examples of secondary user interface include the "Page Information" dialogue commonly found in Web user agents, and the "Security Properties" dialogue that can obtained by clicking the padlock icon in common Web user agents. [Definition: Location Bar is a widget in a Web user agent's user interface which displays (and often allows input of) the textual location (entered as a URL) of the resource being requested (or displayed - after the response is received).] ------------------------------------------ Also useful what the discussion of 3.1 Product classes http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/#conformance-products This specification addresses Web user agents as a product class. This specification also addresses products that might incorporate changes to a web user agents, such as plug-ins, extensions, and others; they are summarily called [Definition: plug-ins] in this section. Such products that might incorporate changes to the web user agent, e.g. through the addition or removal of features, can render an otherwise conforming web user agent non conforming, or vice versa. ------------------------ WSC has several levels of warning(caution, dangerous) 6.4.2 Warning/Caution Messages http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/#error-warning And 6.4.3 Danger Messages http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/#error-danger Does UAAG need success criteria for this? how should a UA communicate these warnings to the user? How does a UA communicate the info now? The goal should be: when UA presents information, that information must meet platform accessibility standards or WCAG standards depending on how the UA presents the information. We want dialogs, alerts, warnings to be accessible and distinguishable in a multimodal manner (visually and auditorially - some sound is played). The security group also mentions temporal...disabling the OK button for a number of seconds to make sure the user can't dismiss a danger message out of hand by immediately hitting enter when the dialog pops up. Also of concern is !! 7.3 Managing User Attention http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/#interaction-flooding "when users interact with security relevant notifications interactions caused by web content MUST NOT be granted control of the user agents interaction." Does this mean java script should not be allowed to click an OK button in a dialog? Does the UA not allow javascript to interact in this fashion now? How does the UA know that an alert is a security notification? Does UAAG need success criteria for this? At first I thought yes...then on reflection...no...it is covered in WSC. We should focus on accessibility. I propose that the UAWG add a dependency on this document. =============================== Comments to WSC WSC: User Interface should reference UAAG20 6.1.1 Identity Signal http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/#identity-requirement The display of security information (e.g. AA indicator (5.3), Identity signals (6.1.1) must conform to UAAG - name, role, and state must be available programmatically, must be easily discoverable by the user, and have a keybinding in the UI so the user can navigate to the information. This information appears in the UA UI, and is or should be under the control of the user agent - not the author. In 6.1.2 Identity Signal Content http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/#signal-content what is "human-readable information"? Is it text? If it is an image, it must have name, role, state, label (expanded information related to role) Any thoughts. Jim
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 18:40:38 UTC