Thread Subject: Re: General Issues: Browser Requirements

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Sat, Jan 20 2007 11:30 PM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: None
• Previous message in thread: David Poehlman: "Re: General Issues: Browser Requirements"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

Note that this is a SHOULD not a SHALL. It is therefore a recommendation
not a requirement. So JavaAT, or Firevox would conform. This is listed as
advice rather than a requirement for just that reason.


Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of David Poehlman
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 5:17 AM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] General Issues: Browser Requirements
>
> Yes, this would seem to trump a perfectly accessible environment.
>
> On Jan 10, 2007, at 12:00 PM, Sean Hayes wrote:
>
> It seems to me it is the reponsibility of the platform to
> live up to the requirements, whether it chooses to do so by
> defering to the underlying platform, or by implementing it
> itself might seem to be an implementation decision.
>
> Having said that however since such a platform is also client
> software, the ISO provision 8.6.3 Use standard accessibility
> services states "Software that provides user interface
> elements shall use the accessibility services provided by the
> system to cooperate with assistive technologies".
>
> Which would (unless I am reading it wrongly) tend to suggest
> that a JavaAT, or Firevox approach would be incorrect if it
> interfaced directly with AT and did not in turn use the
> underlying platform capability to do so?
>
> 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:teitac- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> Behalf Of Peter Korn
> Sent: 10 January 2007 16:35
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] General Issues: Browser Requirements
>
> Hi Sean,
>
> > Browsers, Players, and Virtual machines are all special cases of
> > platform software like the OS and probably should be subject to
> > similar rules. I'd be unhappy to single out just browsers
> (assuming we
> > could even adequately define browser).
> >
>
> I agree with this completely. Browsers, Flash, Java runtime
> - they are all examples of a platform, and accessibility
> requirements for "platforms" should apply to them. The only
> distinction I would make is whether the AT resides at that
> platform layer or not. Most AT resides at the OS "platform"
> (though there has been work on Java AT [IBM] and Browser AT
> [variety of folks]). When the AT resides at a different
> platform, then additional work is needed - e.g. when it is
> JAWS on Windows, the browser has to do work to convey HTML
> information out to Windows; when it is the Firevox speech
> extension to Firefox, the information need not be conveyed
> out to Windows because the AT resides inside the browser platform.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter Korn
> Accessibility Architect,
> Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> > 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:teitac-
> > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Andi Snow-Weaver
> > Sent: 09 January 2007 22:13
> > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > Subject: [teitac-websoftware] General Issues: Browser Requirements
> >
> >
> > Some have suggested that we might want to impose some
> requirements on
> > browser. For example, if browsers provided more keyboard
> support, ATs
> > wouldn't have to and users who don't use AT would benefit.
> >
> > Thoughts on this topic?
> >
> > Andi
> >
> >

• Next message in Thread: None
• Previous message in Thread: David Poehlman: "Re: General Issues: Browser Requirements"