Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2

> My main point, is do we need to include the semantics as actual mark-up.
> For example, do we need to associate 'title' and 'description' with
> everything?  To take an HTML example.  You can tell that a heading is a
> heading due to the use of <H1> or another heading tag.  However, you could
> use font attributes or CSS to achieve the same visual effect, and still
> visually denote it as a heading.  So, people can extract meaning based on
> attributes such as size, position, color, etc. and not on any mark-up.
The
> same goes for images, where people extract meaning based on image
> attributes.
I think that would be a WCAG violation. You are meant to use header tags to
represent headers.

But (I think)  you are saying it should not be a violation.

Some systems can analyze fonts etc but they are trying to put back what
should have been their in the first place.

At some point a human needs to check the associations. For example is pink
always imply Feminine interest, often but not always.
Removing ambiguities in language is hard enough, in format and associations
of them is much harder.

In SWAP we guise roles and association, but the author then can edit that
knowledge. Knowledge is captured in RDF which is , at the end of the day,
just markup.

With fuzzy guesses, I want the  author to confirm how accurate the guess is,
not the user.  So these tools are great to help the author add semantics
fast, but , when done only at the user end, can end up with misinformation.
And that is the last thing we want.

A working case of this happening is automatic tools that remove ambiguities
in Hebrew by adding diatric marks.

Some of them are quite good, and guess right 95% of words

But when they guess wrong, the user is given a correct sentence, that is
just absolutely not what the author was saying.. Sometimes it can even be
the opposite.

That's why i would like the  author to use the tool, see when the mistakes
occur and then correct the diatric marks that the tool put in.

My 2 cents
lisa

.
> What I'm trying to illustrate, is that we don't necessarily need to
include
> textual equivalents such as 'title' or 'description' to make something
> accessible.  Providing we can convey the attributes that form the meaning,
> in an accessible form, then you've got yourself accessible content.  This
> idea that everything needs textual equivalents really doesn't work in
> practice.  Most content authors just put in meaningless information, if
they
> put it in at all, which is why graphics still remain a problem in
HTML+CSS.
>
> Ultimately, I'm just trying to suggest an unconventional way to make it
> accessible, which revolves around the user, and what the user can and
cannot
> do, rather than relying on content authors to do something.
>
> Will
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
> To: "Will Pearson" <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>; "Lisa Seeman"
> <lisa@ubaccess.com>; <wai-xtech@w3.org>
> Cc: <oedipus@hicom.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:59 AM
> Subject: Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2
>
>
> > Will and all,
> >
> > I'm not sure what you are saying.  If there are no semantics, we get no
> > information about the kinds of things gregory was asking for.  If there
> are
> > semantics and we zoom to a particular station on the map, the semantics
if
> > they are rich enough provide us with all the info we need about that
> station
> > and we can even zoom in further say to platform a and read the signs on
> it.
> >
> > Johnnie Apple Seed
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Will Pearson" <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>
> > To: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; "Lisa
> > Seeman" <lisa@ubaccess.com>; <wai-xtech@w3.org>
> > Cc: <oedipus@hicom.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 6:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes I agree granularity would be useful, but it depends on what you're
> > navigating to.  If you're navigating between container elements, such as
> > groups and symbols, then you have the distinction between granular
levels
> > provided by these groupings, if you're just navigating between graphic
> > elements, such as <LINE>, <RECT>, <CIRCLE>, etc, then there's no
> syntactical
> > groupings.  There may be visual groupings, and these will be exposed
> through
> > revealing the spatial relationships via spatial navigation.
> >
> > As for semantics, well, are they really necessary?  According to
> psychology,
> > meaning is something we associate with stimuli.  We receive stimuli,
such
> as
> > sound, lightwaves, etc., and then group it into groups based on
perceptual
> > psychology rules, such as the Gestalt laws of perception.  The final
stage
> > is to associate meaning with this stimuli, based on what we've been
> > conditioned to believe the perceived stimuli represents.  So, I believe,
> > that if we can communicate the stimuli in another, non visual, form,
then
> > the user can learn the meaning associated with it, just as sighted
people
> > associate meaning with visual stimuli.
> >
> > Having said that, I wouldn't stand in the way of more semantic
> information.
> > As we're using mainly sequential output media, such as Speech and
Braille,
> > it will probably be a slow process to communicate all the attributes of
> the
> > stimuli to the user.  There's two ways to sort this, either the AT
vendors
> > look into multiple methods of encoding meaning within the output
channel,
> or
> > we reduce the amount of information being conveyed.  This reduction in
> > information is where semantics would be useful, as it would reduce the
> > amount of information conveyed to just the meaning, and would also
reduce
> > the amount of cognitive activity required by the user, as they would no
> > longer be required to perform the association between stimuli and
meaning.
> >
> > So, semantic information isn't required in the mark-up in order for
> someone
> > to access the semantic meaning behind images, but would improve the
> > usability of images.
> >
> > Will
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
> > To: "Lisa Seeman" <lisa@ubaccess.com>; <wai-xtech@w3.org>; "Will
Pearson"
> > <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>
> > Cc: <oedipus@hicom.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 9:31 AM
> > Subject: Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2
> >
> >
> > > Lisa,
> > >
> > > After thinking about this, I came to the conclusion yesterday that the
> > > ability to change granularity if supportable would be something that
> would
> > > be needed and I agree that this might get us the finer details
although
> I
> > > hadn't thought of it in such a concrete fashion but it is also
important
> > to
> > > retain the spatial relationships within the image so we need to be
able
> to
> > > move in multiple and varying directions as well as gather fine details
> but
> > > as you say, it's not supported to that level of semantic information.
> > >
> > > Johnnie Apple Seed
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "Lisa Seeman" <lisa@ubaccess.com>
> > > To: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>;
> > > <wai-xtech@w3.org>; "Will Pearson" <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>
> > > Cc: <oedipus@hicom.net>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 3:25 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I spoke to Gregory briefly last night. I think the main point for our
> chat
> > > (other then just being good to chat to him)  was what is needed is an
> > > ability to switch granularity. In other words, to zoom in in the
details
> > and
> > > then take a step back,(whilst staying were you are) and look around,
and
> > > then see detail.
> > >
> > > Take for example an SVG subway map. You want to go to station X, so
look
> > at
> > > station x for details, is it accessible? Does it have an accessible
> > > bathroom. If the answer is no, then I would want to switch
> granularities,
> > > and be able to navigate around the different stations. When i get to a
> > > station I know is close, then i would want to zoom in and get
> information.
> > >
> > > So the proposal would be like ctr arrow up would switch granulates up.
> > >
> > > But there is little point to that because there is not the supporting
> the
> > > language to support the concepts behind it.
> > >
> > > Basically it comes down to the lack of semantic information , and the
> need
> > > for identification and integrity of blocks of content and to know what
> > they
> > > intend to be, and what state they have, and relationships with other
> > > content.
> > >
> > > It was very similar for the need of content and concept zoom that i
> > > suggested for Math ml, SVG and XHTML. Where you can identify on
concept
> as
> > > being part or a conceptual zooming in of another section of content.
> > >
> > > At the moment we can do this with RDF, but it would be much easer to
> > promote
> > > if the languages themselves supported it.
> > >
> > > Lisa
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
> > > To: "Lisa Seeman" <lisa@ubaccess.com>; <wai-xtech@w3.org>; "Will
> Pearson"
> > > <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>
> > > Cc: <oedipus@hicom.net>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 3:16 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2
> > >
> > >
> > > > Lisa,
> > > >
> > > > It is possible with anything to get lost, but it is also quite
> possible
> > > for
> > > > people who have a good memory of spatial things such as myself and
> > > possibly
> > > > will and many others that this would be a usefull tool.  AS to where
> it
> > > fits
> > > > in the scheeme of things with respect to ua, at or svg spec is
> something
> > > to
> > > > be hashed out but keyboard exploration of diagrams needs to be
enabled
> > for
> > > > without it, we are lost.
> > > >
> > > > It would be interesting to hear Gregory's thoughts, I do think
though
> > that
> > > > there is a good deal of research behind the possibilities of this
> > working
> > > > though.
> > > >
> > > > Johnnie Apple Seed
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > > From: "Lisa Seeman" <lisa@ubaccess.com>
> > > > To: <wai-xtech@w3.org>; "Will Pearson" <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>
> > > > Cc: <oedipus@hicom.net>
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 1:51 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > My concern is that you would get terribly lost.
> > > >
> > > > But is anyone thinks this might be useful, and could do it ,  it
would
> > be
> > > > Gregory Rosmaiter. So I am cc'ing him.
> > > > I will also try and ask him.
> > > >
> > > > Keep well
> > > > L
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > >   From: Will Pearson
> > > >   To: wai-xtech@w3.org
> > > >   Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 10:38 PM
> > > >   Subject: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   Hi;
> > > >
> > > >   At the moment there's no clear indication within the spec that
> > document
> > > > exploration should be made available through a ua's keyboard
> interface.
> > > > Whilst most people will be able to visually explore the image, this
> > won't
> > > be
> > > > possible for some users, and may not be possible for others.
> Therefore,
> > I
> > > > would like to suggest that some form of navigation between container
> > > > elements and graphic elements be recommended as a guideline for ua
> > > > developers.  This should facilitate exploration of the document away
> > from
> > > > any elements with 'focusable' set to true, or active elements with
> > > > 'focusable' set to auto.
> > > >
> > > >   Ideally, this would be based on spatial direction, thus allowing
the
> > > user
> > > > to build up a mental model of the spatial relationships between
> > elements.
> > > >
> > > >   The spec already makes provision for a range of alternative
pointing
> > > > devices, through DOM 3 I think, but I think we need something a bit
> more
> > > > granular than a pixel by pixel movement typically offered by
pointing
> > > > devices.  The main reason for this, is that the HCI task analysis
for
> > > moving
> > > > two points require the user to know where the pointer is in relation
> to
> > > the
> > > > target.  This can be done with speech, and there's an event in JAWS
to
> > > > handle this, but having experimented with this on a small number of
> > users,
> > > > doing the math necessary to work out the relationship between
pointer
> > and
> > > > target raised the cognitive workload, as measured by the NASA-TLX
> test,
> > > > quite significantly.
> > > >
> > > >   So, I propose the following eight keys to facilitate document
> > > exploration
> > > > within a ua:
> > > >                              I.       Up (337.5 - 22.5)
> > > >
> > > >                            II.      Diagonally up and right (22.5 -
> > > 67.5)
> > > >
> > > >                           III.       Right (67.5 - 112.5)
> > > >
> > > >                        IV.       Diagonally down and right (112.5 -
> > > 157.5)
> > > >
> > > >                          V.       Down (157.5 - 202.5)
> > > >
> > > >                        VI.       Diagonally down and left (202.5 -
> > > 247.5)
> > > >
> > > >                       VII.       Left (247.5 - 292.5)
> > > >
> > > >                     VIII.      Diagonally left and up (292.5 -
> 337.5)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   Each of these keys will be responsible for moving to the nearest
> > element
> > > > within a 45 arc, as listed above.
> > > >
> > > >   Will
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 13:14:40 UTC