Thread Subject: Re: 22(l) and 22(m) Scripts, applets,and plug-ins

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: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Mon, Feb 19 2007 4:00 PM

We should also look at the other provisions in WCAG 2.0 to see if they are
covered. Also other provisions that relate to the web as it is evolving.
Like multimedia and dynamic content.


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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Andi Snow-Weaver
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 2:53 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: [teitac-websoftware] 22(l) and 22(m) Scripts,
> applets, and plug-ins
>
>
> We have not yet closed on a recommendation for 22(l) scripts
> and 22 (m) applets and plug-ins.
>
> The current 508 standard on scripts is insufficient and for
> applets and plug-ins, 508 refers back to the software
> requirements. In contrast, WCAG 2.0 tries to address all
> kinds of Web content, whether it is static information or
> interactive software. Scripts, applets and plug-ins must all
> be assessed against all WCAG 2.0 requirements. When we
> discussed scripts, applets, and plug-ins in our subcommittee,
> we ended up with a preference for the WCAG 2.0 approach as
> long as we believe that all of the current 508 requirements
> are covered by the WCAG 2.0 requirements.
>
> In order to determine whether this is the case, Jim Thatcher
> and Earl Johnson created a mapping of all of the 1194.21
> requirements to WCAG 2.0.
> [1].
>
> Everything that is in 1194.21 today is covered in WCAG 2.0
> except for the following four items:
>
> 21(b) Applications shall not disrupt or disable activated
> features of other products that are identified as
> accessibility features, where those features are developed
> and documented according to industry standards.
> Applications also shall not disrupt or disable activated
> features of any operating system that are identified as
> accessibility features where the application programming
> interface for those accessibility features has been
> documented by the manufacturer of the operating system and is
> available to the product developer.
>
> - Jim and Earl assessed this as not applicable because Web
> applications don't have access to these features of the
> system. Does this mean we have a requirement in the current
> 508 standard that applets and plug-ins can't meet or that
> this is truly not applicable to applets and plug-ins?
>
> 1194.21(c) A well-defined on-screen indication of the current
> focus shall be provided that moves among interactive
> interface elements as the input focus changes. The focus
> shall be programmatically exposed so that assistive
> technology can track focus and focus changes.
>
> - We have been discussing this ourselves. Some feel that this
> is a user agent responsibility. But for some types of
> content, like Flash, developers clearly have a responsibility
> to provide this. We have a proposal on a Web requirement for
> this but we did not reach consensus on it. [2]?
>
> 1194.21(f) Textual information shall be provided through
> operating system functions for displaying text. The minimum
> information that shall be made available is text content,
> text input caret location, and text attributes.
>
> - Is this really an issue for applets and plug-ins? If so,
> then we need to be making a proposal for an additional
> requirement in WCAG 2.0.
>
> 1194.21(g) Applications shall not override user selected
> contrast and color selections and other individual display attributes.
>
> - Web content does not have access to these features of the
> operating system. This was identified as an issue with the
> current 508 standard during our discussion of applets and
> plug-ins. [3]
>
> We also have the issue user agent issue of keyboard operation
> with regard to entering and exiting applet or plug-in content
> with the keyboard.
>
> There are a few other issues, as identified in the mapping
> table, most of which we are already working on proposals to
> address. But we can't go backwards in the 508 refresh. So, if
> we want to recommend that 508 take the same approach as WCAG
> 2.0 for scripts, applets, and plug-ins, we would need resolve
> the above issues and also recommend adding the following WCAG
> 2.0 requirement to 508:
>
> 4.1.2 For all user interface components, the name and role
> can be programmatically determined, states, properties, and
> values that can be set by the user can be programmatically
> determined and programmatically set, and notification of
> changes to these items is available to user agents, including
> assistive technologies." (Level 1)
>
> Comments?
>
> [1] http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_mapping
> [2] http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_Web_Gaps#Focus_Indicator
> [3]
> http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_Web_provisions#22.28l
> .29_.26_22.28m.29
>
> Andi
>
>

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University