- From: WBS Mailer on behalf of <shawn@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 18:32:01 +0000
- To: wai-eo-editors@w3.org
Here are the answers submitted to 'EOWG Call for Review: Why Standards
Harmonization is Essential to Web Accessibility, 2006 March' (Education
and Outreach Working Group) for Shawn Henry.
---------------------------------
Why Standards Harmonization is Essential to Web Accessibility
----
* ( ) I accept this version of the document as is
* (x) I accept this version of the document, and suggest changes below
* ( ) I accept this version of the document only with the changes below
* ( ) I do not accept this version of the document because of the
comments below
* ( ) I abstain (not vote)
---------------------------------
Comments
----
Comments on the document, formatted as described above.
Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments):
priority: HIGH - [editor's discretion]
location: Consequences, Web Development
current wording: " Development of accessible Web sites with today's
authoring tools may also require Web developers to work around
inconsistent support of Web standards needed for accessibility support in
browsers and media players. For instance, inconsistent initial support in
browsers for…”
suggested revision: edit to make point more clear . is “with today's
authoring tools” suppose to be “with today's user agents” ?
rationale: can’t parse sentence, or understand meaning in context.
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview or other
suggested revision: define "Web content" (or link to definition)
(at /WAI/CVS/WWW/WAI/intro/accessibility.php#content we have "Web
"content" generally refers to the information in a Web page or Web
application, including text, images, forms, sounds, and such. More
specific definitions are available in the WCAG documents, which are linked
from the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview.")
rationale: jargon
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Abstract
suggested revision: include accessibility of authoring tools
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview
current wording: browsers and media players
suggested revision: browsers, media players, and other "user agents"
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview
current wording: "While W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0..."
suggested revision: spell out W3C on first reference
priority: [editor's discretion]
location:
- "Harmonization of Web accessibility standards is key to making an
accessible Web, because it creates a unified market for authoring tools
which produce conformant content."
- "Together these three WAI guidelines provide mutually reinforcing
solutions which result in more comprehensive and effective accessibility."
- "For organizations which currently have guidelines that diverge from
international standards…”
- [others?]
suggested revision: which>that
rationale: "which" is to introduce nonrestrictive clauses, and "that" is
to introduce restrictive clauses. generally, which should be preceded with
a comma
location:
- "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1.0), which describe..."
"Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (ATAG 1.0), which
describe..."
"User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (UAAG 1.0), which describe.."
suggested revision: delete ", which" or change to "that"
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview
current wording: "...minimally aware of the rationale for Web
accessibility, or disinclined to learn guidelines and techniques for
accessibility."
suggested revision: change "disinclined"
rationale: uncommon word for English speakers, also may be difficult to
translate
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview
current wording:
"- the Web Content..."
"- the Authoring Tool..."
"- the User Agent ..."
suggested revision: delete "the"
rationale: much stronger & easier to skim
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview
current wording: "The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Accessibility
Initiative (WAI) has developed:
- Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1.0)...
- Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (ATAG 1.0)...
- User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (UAAG 1.0)..."
suggested revision: link to Overview pages:
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.php
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/atag.php
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/uaag.php
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview
current wording: "describe how to make browsers and media players
accessible, and how to ensure their interoperability with assistive
technologies."
suggested revision: "...and how to ensure they are interoperable with
assistive technologies."
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Overview
current wording: W3C/WAI
suggested revision: W3C WAI
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Current situation
current wording: "...as they will then need to support potentially
conflicting sets of implementation and evaluation techniques."
suggested revision: add multiple: "...as they will then need to support
multiple, potentially conflicting sets of implementation and evaluation
techniques."
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Current situation
current wording: "For each such factor, or "fragmentation driver,"
however, there is also a good reason to promote harmonization of
standards:
suggested revision: something more like "However, these factors, or
"fragmentation drivers", are myths and there is also a good reason to
promote harmonization of standards:" [still needs work]
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Current situation
current wording: "[NOTE: a linearized version of the following table is
available.]"
suggested revision: delete linearized version.
rationale: unnecessary complexity - don't see reason to have a linearized
version of a simple 2-column table
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Current situation
current wording: "[NOTE: a linearized version of the following table is
available.]"
suggested revision: change "linearized"
rationale: jargon
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: table
suggested revision: set CSS top, e.g.:
tr {vertical-align: top;}
rationale: better spacing within cell for readability & visual aesthetics
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: table
current wording: "Disability needs with regard to Web accessibility do not
vary significantly from country to country."
suggested revision: humm... credibility alert here - some people *do*
think that they vary...
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: table
current wording: "...may need access to the Web-based resources of a
particular country."
suggested revision: delete "based": "...may need access to the Web
resources of a particular country."
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: table
current wording: "People with disabilities from other countries, with the
same needs for accessibility and using the same kinds of assistive
technologies, may need access to the Web-based resources of a particular
country.”
suggested revision: edit to make point more clear
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: table
current wording: "Because Web technologies are constantly evolving,
ongoing development and maintenance of local guidelines and techniques
into the future may be prohibitively resource-intensive.
suggested revision: edit to make point more clear
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Consequences, Web Development
current wording: "Authoring tools that conform to ATAG 1.0 would provide
built-in support for production of accessible Web sites.”
suggested revision: remove “would”! "Authoring tools that conform to
ATAG 1.0 provide built-in support for production of accessible Web
sites.”
priority: HIGH - [editor's discretion] note, repeated from top in case
missed up there having processed in 2 batches :-)
location: Consequences, Web Development
current wording: " Development of accessible Web sites with today's
authoring tools may also require Web developers to work around
inconsistent support of Web standards needed for accessibility support in
browsers and media players. For instance, inconsistent initial support in
browsers for…”
suggested revision: edit to make point more clear . is “with today's
authoring tools” suppose to be “with today's user agents” ?
rationale: can’t parse sentence, or understand meaning in context.
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Authoring Tools
current wording: "Increased availability of authoring tools conforming to
the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (ATAG 1.0) is key to
making the Web accessible because, with such tools, Web content
developers…”
suggested revision: remove commas: "Increased availability of authoring
tools conforming to the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (ATAG
1.0) is key to making the Web accessible because with such tools Web
content developers…” or put one because: "Increased availability of
authoring tools conforming to the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines
1.0 (ATAG 1.0) is key to making the Web accessible, because with such
tools Web content developers…”
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Evaluation Tools
current wording: “Developers of evaluation tools are also impacted by
fragmented standards, as these can delay, and/or increase the development
cost, of the evaluation tools. Time needed to implement evaluation tests
for conflicting versions of guidelines could otherwise be used to improve
evaluation tools by increasing their usability or accuracy.”
suggested revision: and/or >and, remove commas, or>and: "Developers of
evaluation tools are also impacted by fragmented standards, as these can
delay and increase the development cost of the evaluation tools. Time
needed to implement evaluation tests for conflicting versions of
guidelines could otherwise be used to improve evaluation tools by
increasing their usability and accuracy.”
priority: [editor's discretion] – probably list for next revision
location: Organizations. end
suggested revision: add the idea that the same effort results in less
accessibility when time is spent dealing with multiple standards, and/or
the positive perspective of the same idea: that the same effort results in
more accessibility when the org only has to deal with one harmonized
standard
rationale:
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: heading
current wording: "Browsers, Media Players, and Assistive Technologies”
suggested revision: “Browsers, Media Players, Assistive Technologies,
and Other User Agents”
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Browsers, Media Players, and Assistive Technologies
current wording: "UAAG 1.0 also describes requirements for browsers and
media players that can work smoothly with assistive technologies, which
some people with disabilities use, such as screen readers, screen
magnifiers, and voice recognition software.
suggested revision: copyedit
priority: [editor's discretion] – probably list for next revision
location: Browsers, Media Players, and Assistive Technologies
current wording: “
suggested revision: 1. consider moving up, as this talks about authoring
tools as well as user agents. 2. consider adding roles of developers &
users, e.g., see “The Implementation Cycle” section of
http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/components.php
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Information Repositories
suggested revision: move lower, does not belong at the same level as Web
Development, Authoring Tools, Evaluation Tools, etc.
rationale: very specific, specialized example
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Action Steps
current wording: “WAI is currently developing the Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines 2.0...
suggested revision: link: <a href=“/WAI/intro/wcag20.php”>Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines 2.0</a>
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Action Steps
current wording: “WCAG 2.0 is expected to be easier to understand and to
implement, and more precisely testable; and it will address more advanced
Web technologies.”
suggested revision: delete “easier to understand”
rationale: WCAG 2.0 itself (that is, the guidelines, not the
“Understanding” doc) is much *harder* to understand.
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Action Steps
current wording: “WCAG 2.0 … it will address more advanced Web
technologies.
suggested revision: consider deleting “advanced”: “it will address
more Web technologies” since it is addressing more technologies, period,
including advanced and not so advanced
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Action Steps
current wording: “and help lead more rapidly to an accessible Web:”
suggested revision: copyedit
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Action Steps
current wording: “Assist in preparing authorized translations of WAI
guidelines according to W3C's policy for authorized translations
suggested revision: link to the policy
rationale: (I know, have it linked before, but good to have it again here
so that they don’t have to go back up looking for it)
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Action Steps
suggested revision: copyedit
priority: [editor's discretion]
location: Related Resources
suggested revision: take single items out of <UL>
rationale: using semantic markup for visual presentation
These answers were last modified on 16 March 2006 at 18:29:35 U.T.C.
by Shawn Henry
Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/harmon/ until 2006-03-18.
Regards,
The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Thursday, 16 March 2006 18:32:18 UTC