- From: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 18:17:04 -0400
- To: www-qa@w3.org
- Cc: w3c-wai-cg@w3.org
At 2:51 PM -0400 5/11/05, Karl Dubost wrote: >Dear Wendy, > >Thanks for your comments on the Last Call version of the QA Framework: >Specification Guidelines[0] - 22 November 2004 > >After two weeks from now (on May 18, 2005), the lack of answer will >be considered as if you had accepted the comment. Wendy has allowed me to serve as scribe for this reply. Your disposition was discussed a bit on the WAI CG teleconference on 18 May and the following reply has been discussed, again for a limited time but meeting with rough consensus of those who have responded, on the WAI CG email list. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-cg/2005AprJun/thread.html#73 <reply> <meta name="rfc2822:In-Reply-To" value="http://www.w3.org/mid/425D4FEE-3091-4BF7-BADD-A147F52D1BAA@w3.org"/> <summary class="executive overview"> <section> <title>Agreement in principle</title> The WAI CG agrees with the principle of the resolution as we understand it. This is - The scope of this document will not include imposing accessibility requirements on the developers of specifications. That authority will flow from other sources such as the Process Document, the Architecture Document, the Recommendations developed by the WAI, etc. - Accessibility is too important to go utterly un-mentioned in this document and will be addressed in Section 3 which discusses the wider context in which this document is to be used. </section> <section> <title>Disagreement on Implementation</title> On the other hand, the WAI CG does not agree that the language as included in the April 28 draft implements these principles successfully. We have offered some edits below that would enable us to concur that the new language implements the agreement in principle and that the document should proceed to PR. </section> </summary> <change class="clarity"> <quote class="changeFrom" cite="http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#scope-goals"> This document is a guide for W3C specification editors and authors. It provides guidelines for writing better specifications. </quote> <draft class="changeTo"> This document identifies practices to be followed in writing W3C specifications which serve to make conformance to those specifications crisp and clear. </draft> <rationale> The existing language is true on the scope of the document and true beyond the scope of the document. It is not scoping. The proposed alternate language describes the extent of the topic actually covered in this document. The double-negative that almost backs into a scope statement in the final paragraph of this section does not suffice as a positive statement of the scope of this document. To wit: <quote cite="http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#scope-goals"> In addition to conformance, there are several other topics that should be addressed when writing a specification, such as accessibility, internationalization, security, and device independence. These topics are not directly in the scope of this document, but are... </quote> </rationale> <note class="grammar"> The proposed language uses the pronoun 'which' in a restrictive sense. This is British usage, and violates American usage. If the intent is to base W3C specifications on American usage, the 'which' should be replaced by 'that' so as to preserve the restrictive quality of the clause. </note> <quote class="changeFrom"> Beyond the way Working Groups define the conformance model of their technologies, they should also take into account many important considerations that will profoundly affect usage of the technologies. Among them, accessibility, internationalization and device independence are currently supported by W3C Activities and should have a particular focus from other Working Groups. Workings Groups need to design their technologies with accessibility in mind, esp. if they define technologies used in User Interactions context (e.g. HTML, SVG). Addressing accessibility in a specification increases the likelihood that the defined technology can be accessed by everyone regardless of disability. Otherwise, it may take several revisions before software addresses accessibility features, leaving people with disabilities behind. For accessibility of XML-based vocabularies defined in a specification, refer to the XML Accessibility Guidelines [XAG]. For other information about specification accessibility, refer to the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). </quote> <draft class="changeTo"> First and foremost, W3C specifications need to frame and define technologies that meet the requirements of the particular deliverable, fulfill the charter of the Working Group, and advance the Mission of the Consortium. The Mission of the Consortium involves extending the exchange of information through the Web to everyone. Thus the requirements of Accessibility, Internationalization and Device Independence are general requirements that must be considered in the specification of all Web technologies. The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) is a Domain of the Consortium. The WAI develops resources that assist all Web stakeholders to contribute to and benefit from the accessibility of the web. Specification developers should consult the Technical Reports Page for an up-to-date profile of W3C publications in all areas. In addition, they will find the WAI Home Page a helpful guide or starting point with a focus on accessibility. To date the Consortium has produced several Recommendations dealing with Accessibility. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WCAG10] identifies requirements for information transiting the web. The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines [UAAG10] identifies requirements for software that users use to extract information from the Web. The Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines [ATAG10] identifies requirements for software that authors use to publish information to the web. For some further suggestions on how User Interface formats can support these requirements, authors may wish to consult the Working Draft "XML Accessibility Guidelines" [XAG]. </draft> <note class="linking"> In the above the abbreviations WCAG10, UAAG10, ATAG10, XAG are hyperlinked, and in addition the phrases "Technical Reports Page" and "WAI Home Page." </note> </change> >Original Comment (Issue 1087 [1]): >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Feb/0005.html > >As a response to your comment, the QA Working Group has partially >accepted your >comment. > >The QA Working Group agrees with the request of the WAI CG that SpecGL > should mention the need to consider accessibility while writing a >specification, but disagree with making this a normative requirement > in SpecGL, since its scope in this version of the document is mainly >focused on conformance related items and that QA WG participants don't > have enough background and experience to add further requirements on > this topic at this stage of development. In addition to accessibility, >the QA Working Group has decided that SpecGL should mention the need to > additionally consider internationalization and device independence while > writing a specification. Accordingly, a new Section 3.3 (Accessibility, > Internationalization, and Device Independence Considerations) has been > created in the revised SpecGL draft [2]. Note that there is a reference to > the XML Accessibility Guidelines within Section 3.3. > >[0] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/ >[1]: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1087 >[2]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#address-other-topics > >-- >Karl Dubost >QA Working Group Chair >http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2005 22:17:09 UTC