- From: Richards, Jan <jrichards@ocadu.ca>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 13:45:23 +0000
- To: Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org>
- CC: UAWG <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Hi Jeanne, A couple of comments: 1. I don't think the Open Web platform is the definitive list of W3C web technologies. What about PNG and timed text? (or are they subsumed somewhere?) And of course it doesn't include PDF. 2. IMO Angry Birds is actually analogous to the airlines app (except instead of having a primarily text-based UI, it has a primarily graphical/physical UI): Angry Birds likely has an architecture that splits the game functionality from the scenario data. The Angry Birds scenarios are likely each stored as a data file (maybe in XML) that characterize the location of the different building materials and characters (e.g., that a piece of glass stretches from point1 to point 2 with thickness X). The user loads the Angry Birds app and then selects a scenario by number. The app then retrieves the scenario data (from the drive, but theoretically from the Web), reads it and then renders it onscreen (i.e., a bluish line) and facilitates end-user interaction with it (i.e. by throwing birds at it and figuring out how it should break, fall down etc.). :) Cheers, Jan (MR) JAN RICHARDS PROJECT MANAGER INCLUSIVE DESIGN RESEARCH CENTRE (IDRC) OCAD UNIVERSITY T 416 977 6000 x3957 F 416 977 9844 E jrichards@ocadu.ca > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeanne Spellman [mailto:jeanne@w3.org] > Sent: June-07-13 7:27 AM > To: Simon Harper > Cc: jimallan@tsbvi.edu; kelly.ford@microsoft.com; > kim@redstartsystems.com; UAWG > Subject: Re: User Agent Definitions Agian > > Hi Simon, > > The mobile apps as user agent issue is not wrapped up. The discussion has > spread to the WAI Coordination Group (CG) because several other WAI > groups are also involved in the outcome of this discussion. UAWG are going > to discuss this at our meeting on 13 June, to prepare our analysis of the > argument. Jim & Kelly will present our thoughts at the next CG meeting on 19 > June, and hopefully have some conclusions from CG for our UAWG meeting > on 20 June. > > That said, this an interesting angle that I don't think anyone has presented. I > think that the challenge is to find the delimiter (of what is or is not a mobile > user agent) that is flexible to go beyond our current hardware/software. > Even though we want to address technology beyond W3C, saying that a user > agent supports any of the Open Web Platform (especially the Web APIs) may > have the appropriate flexibility. > I don't want us looking back in 3 years with regrets that we were so > shortsighted in 2013. > > Several of the WAI team were discussing the problem at a meeting this > week, and agree that it is a difficult issue. I have been characterizing the > UAWG position that: > "We all agree that Angry Birds is not a user agent, and that a mobile magazine > reader app is, but we don't have consensus on an American Airlines app." > One of my colleagues immediately responded with an HTML5 version of > Angry Birds http://chrome.angrybirds.com/! (To which I > replied: That's content -- WCAG covers it!) > > We had informal agreement that we want to find flexible way to include > mobile applications, because it serves the needs of people with disabilities to > improve the accessibility of mobile apps. > > I have been thinking that if we have A success criteria that are too difficult for > mobile, and that is our reason to not cover mobile apps, then I think I will > propose that we raise the level of those SC that are A because they are easy > for desktop. Source Code view doesn't provide such big benefit to > accessibility (only for expert users), and I would rather see that as an AA or > AAA if it would mean we could provide better guidance to mobile apps. > (Keep reducing the number of level A!). > > Cheers! > > jeanne > > On 6/7/2013 4:29 AM, Simon Harper wrote: > > Guys, > > > > not sure if this is now finsihed - and I don't want to bing it up > > again just because the looping is taking too much time and reaching > > concencus seems to be happening very much. > > > > Anyhow, I had a thought that we could define the guidelines to fulfill > > based on how they handle technologies within the open web platform > > http://www.w3.org/wiki/Open_Web_Platform > > > > the definitive list of open w3c technologies... > > > > Maybe it's now all wrapped up - just a thought? > > > > Cheers > > > > > > -- > _______________________________ > Jeanne Spellman > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative > jeanne@w3.org
Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 13:45:48 UTC