Thread Subject: Re: Gaps in Web requirements- error handlingtechniques
Note
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Sean Hayes
Date: Wed, Jan 10 2007 9:10 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: None
- Previous message in thread: None
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
Yes, but this is error handling. I get that equivalent access would need to be provided for those that can't use the primary modality, however I think error feedback should by default be in the primary modality of the interface. If you are using an equivalent facilitation, then error feedback would also be in the equivalent facilitation.
Sean Hayes
Standards and Policy Team
Accessible Technology Group
Microsoft
Phone:
mob +44 7977 455002
office +44 117 9719730
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
Sent: 10 January 2007 15:32
To: 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Gaps in Web requirements - error handlingtechniques
If direct access is being provided then it would have to be in all the most
appropriate forms (visual, non-visual, non-visual audio enhanced etc.).
If AT compatibility - then text is used because it can be re-presented in
the most appropriate form.
Audio speech for example is a problem for people who are deaf.
Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Sean Hayes
> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:04 AM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Gaps in Web requirements -
> error handlingtechniques
>
> I assume WCAG uses 'in text' as it is assuming it is some
> sort of lowest common denominator, but probably it ought to
> say something like 'in the most appropriate/accessible
> manner' e.g. in a speech interface, speech might be the most
> appropriate.
>
> Sean Hayes
> Standards and Policy Team
> Accessible Technology Group
> Microsoft
> Phone:
> mob +44 7977 455002
> office +44 117 9719730
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Andi Snow-Weaver
> Sent: 09 January 2007 20:45
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Gaps in Web requirements -
> error handling techniques
>
>
> At our meeting last week, we discussed the issue of error
> handling. There was general consensus that recovering from
> errors can be an accessibility issue, there was concern that
> if we try to put something in the standard to cover the issue
> raised, it will be too prescriptive. We briefly discussed the
> WCAG 2.0 provision on error handling. I took an action item
> to post it here as a proposal for discussion this week.
>
> WCAG 2.0 provision on error handling:
>
> If an input error is detected, the error is identified and
> described to the user in text.
>
> WCAG 2.0 provides several strategies (also known as
> sufficient techniques) in the "How to meet" information for
> this provision. See them at
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-200608
> 01/Overview.html#minimize-error-identified
>
> Andi
>
>
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: None
WebAIM is an initiative of:
