Thread Subject: Re: Proposal on authoring tools

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: Judy Brewer
Date: Thu, Jun 07 2007 10:30 AM

Hi Jim,

Thanks. Replying first to your latter batch of comments first (your inline
comments in brackets [ ] below):

At 06:39 AM 6/7/2007 -0400, Jim Tobias wrote:
>Thanks for this, Judy. I've added comments inside brackets [ ] for some
>provisions; I agree with the others.
><...>
> > 1. Authoring tools must have the ability to produce content
> > which passes the electronic content provisions [ADD:for each content
>format it is capable of producing].

Good point -- otherwise one wouldn't necessarily get accessible content
options for the full range of formats that a tool was able to produce.

> > 2. Authoring tools must, except by explicit user action,
> > preserve accessibility information necessary for meeting the
> > electronic content provisions. [Is this for content imported into
>the tool from another source? If so, that should be explicit.]

I believe that the intent of our discussion was that it be for content
imported into, assembled by, or produced by a tool. So if we add a
clarification, we'd need to add the whole string, and perhaps scrub it up
better than my wording here.

> > 4. For authoring tools with a user interface, authoring tools
> > must provide a mode which prompts authors to create
> > accessible content. [This should be the default mode.]

Would this wording capture your intent:
"...authoring tools must provide a default mode which prompts..."
-- or --
"...the default mode of operation must prompt authors to..."
-- or, re-using the language from #2 above --
"...except by explicit user action, authoring tools must prompt..."
Any preference? Reactions?

> > 7. Authoring tools should give prominence to the most
> > accessible authoring action for achieving an authoring outcome.
>[I'm not sure about this --- do you mean prominence in general, or
>prominence in a list of options, or what?]

I do not suggest including all of the following detail, but this background
may be useful for our discussion. Please see the guidance in the ATAG 2.0
Working Draft for B.3.1,
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2007/WD-ATAG20-20070530/WD-ATAG20-20070530.html#check-give-priority>
particularly the rationale, success criteria, and definition which I've
pasted here for reference:

Rationale:
"Authors are most likely to use the first and easiest authoring action they
encounter in the authoring tool user interface that achieves their intended
authoring outcome"

Level A Success Criteria for Guideline B.3.1:
"B.3.1.1 At Least as Prominent: If the authoring tool provides more than
one authoring action that achieves the same authoring outcome, then any of
these actions that utilize accessible authoring practices must be at least
as prominent as any of these action(s) that do not (@@e.g., if tabular data
can be added using preformatted text or table markup, the more accessible
table markup practice is more prominent)."

Definition: Prominence
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2007/WD-ATAG20-20070530/WD-ATAG20-20070530.html#def-Prominence>
"A heuristic measure of the degree to which authors are likely to notice
controls in the authoring tool user interface when operating the authoring
tool. In this document, prominence refers to visual as well as
keyboard-driven navigation. Some of the factors that contribute to the
prominence of a control include:
1. Control size (large controls or controls surrounded by extra white
space may appear to be conferred higher importance),
2. Control order (items that occur early in the "localized" reading
order (e.g., left to right and top to bottom; right to left and top to
bottom) are conferred higher importance),
3. Control grouping (grouping controls together can change the reading
order and the related judgments of importance),
4. advanced options (when the properties are explicitly or implicitly
grouped into sets of basic and advanced properties, the basic properties
may gain apparent importance), and Highlighting (controls may be
distinguished from others using icons, color, styling)."

- Judy


--
Judy Brewer +1.617.258.9741 http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
MIT/CSAIL Building 32-G526
32 Vassar Street
Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA

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