Re: meta comments on XML Accessibility Guidelines

Yes, you decoded the typographically buggy comment address.
Thanks for the metacomments and the question.

On the question concerning multiple semi-equivalent resources:
>By the way, I'm wondering if WAI has any suggestions on how an
>XML application should allow for multiple alternative images
>(e.g., a large and small version, versions with different
>resolutions, b&w versus color versions).  Pointers to such
>information, if such exists, would be appreciated.

[caveat 1] There is no precise WAI position.

On the other hand, one idea within the feasible range is that there should
be something that is a lot like html:object or smil:switch, except that the
fixed "take the first that works" behavior is relaxed a bit to assert

a) the author believes any of these will do the job

b) the User Agent should display at least one if there is one that
meets delivery context constraints.

c) in the absence of preferences from the user, the User Agent
should follow author preferences (formats may define ways to capture these,
as html:object and smil:switch have).  [Refinement of representation for
author preferences is in the domain of Device Independence research and
development, the only WAI concern is that it be interoperable with a
competent representation of delivery context constraints and preferences that
has a vocabulary rich enough to capture access-critical aspects.]

d) the User Agent may display more than one, or one other than the first 
feasible
choice, should this be appropriate from what the User Agent knows of the
delivery context opportunities and preferences.

In other words, there is a declarative assertion of a bag of
roughly-equivalent resources, an author's expected ordering of
preference for selection of one, and an understanding that some
other optimization to select one or more than one may be appropriate
in some circumstances.

So a select-first-match-from-list default structure with a permissive
escape to processing as the superclass select-multiple-from-bag is a rough
summary of the format structure.

[caveat 2]  I could have missed important points.  There is also active debate
but no consensus yet as to the property space to be used in negotiating the
binding of Web interactions to display and input final-form phenomena.

Al

seeAlso:

- UAAG Guideline 2
  http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/guidelines.html#gl-content-access

- master adaptation protocol (author proposes, user disposes):

  some WAI comments on Device Independence
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2001Nov/0069.html

- small illustration at the margin, or example of a negotiated
result reflecting this:

follow the 'smil:customTest.override' attribute through the Content Control
Module for SMIL 2.0.

- some discussion in the content guidelines group
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2001JulSep/thread.html#1000

At 05:07 PM 2002-12-03, Paul Grosso wrote:

>I went to "XML Accessibility Guidelines" at
>http://www.w3.org/TR/xag.html
>to learn about accessibility issues with graphics,
>but I had "accessibility" issues with the document
>as follows.
>
>1.  Using Netscape 4.79, I clicked on the ToC entry for
>       1. Ensure that authors can associate multiple media
>          objects as alternatives
>     and ended up at the top of the document.
>
>     This is apparently because the document doesn't follow
>     the XHTML compatibility guidelines for "maximum forward and
>     backward compatibility" at http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_8
>     and uses IDs only and not <a> tag's name attribute to
>     indicate anchors, effectively making the links in the
>     document unusable for Netscape 4.x browsers.
>
>2.  When wanting to send a comment about this, I read the
>     Status section to find out where to send comments.  In
>     the paragraph where feedback is requested, there is no
>     mailing address for feedback.  The following paragraph
>     includes the non-sentence, parentheses-unbalanced fragment:
>
>   Intermediate updates (publicly archived mailing list: wai-xtech@w3.org.
>
>     I'm hoping that "wai-xtech@w3.org" is the correct address for comments.
>
>
>By the way, I'm wondering if WAI has any suggestions on how an
>XML application should allow for multiple alternative images
>(e.g., a large and small version, versions with different
>resolutions, b&w versus color versions).  Pointers to such
>information, if such exists, would be appreciated.
>
>paul

Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2002 18:36:58 UTC