Thread Subject: Re: Suggested update to 6.1.I so we can remove6.1.B and 6.1.C (forms & scripting)

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: Barrett, Don
Date: Thu, Jun 07 2007 11:30 AM

I looked at the May 30 version and it seems as if all of the current
standards are peppered throughout and it is quite confusing; It may be
just that I alone am confused; what is going on? Is that version
correct?


Don Barrett
Section 508 Coordinator
U.S. Department of Education
(202)-205-8245
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
Hoffman, Allen
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 5:09 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Suggested update to 6.1.I so we can
remove6.1.B and 6.1.C (forms & scripting)

Let me go back to the wiki and revisit.
thanks.



Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Peter
Korn
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 5:03 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Suggested update to 6.1.I so we can
remove 6.1.B and 6.1.C (forms & scripting)

Hi Allen,

I think it would be helpful if we referred to the May 30 draft from the
Editorial Working Group in these discussions.

The change I suggested to 6.1.I (see
http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:Draft_May_30#I.) is part of section 6.1,
which is titled: "If Web or Application Content", which is itself part
of section 6, titled "Electronic Content Provisions". I think 6.1.I
would apply to an PDF form. If not, perhaps we should clarify that in
the 6.1 title.


Regards,

Peter Korn
Accessibility Architect,
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

> Currently forms are addressed in web and software, and we are
> proposing removing that explicit reference as we have delineated what
> must be done for those types of interface elements explicitly. I am
> all for this removal.
>
> What we don't have is something that states what standard must be met
> for interface elements delivered that are not coded in HTML, or pure
> software. PDF forms are not addressed directly to my knowledge,
> neither would forms in Microsoft Word .doc format--or open-document
> format for that matter.
>
> In Information, documentation, and support the first requirement
> proposed now is that documentation meets (insert broad reference to
> subparts B and C), and is in at least one format that meets content
> format accessibility requirements. One theme of TIETAC explicitly
> drawn out at the beginning by the Access-Board was that we should
> decide if content is addressed by 508, and if so how.
>
> To my knowledge current practices include:
> Apply existing web standards broadly to non-HTML content;
> Only apply functional performance criteria to non-HTML content;
> Don't apply anything at all to non-web content;
>
> Content is the largest area we face as almost everyone generates
> content. One-on-one transmission of content from person to person may

> not need to comply with Section 508, but content that migrates towards

> broader audiences or is intended to be read by someone with a
> disability must meet such requirements in my view. Its hard to have
> this both ways, and the impact of including content beyond HTML is
> huge without the simultaneous introduction of requirements for
> authoring tools, now forthcoming from this group.
>
> I think we still need an overarching statement (somewhere) that says
> content must meet (x,y,z). We have it for HTML and generalized
> audio/video content, but not for anything else.
>
> I propose that this be the first item in
> information/documentation/support, or included in functional
> performance criteria, and forms should be explicitly mentioned to
> eliminate any ambiguity about them.
>
> Question is as I read this, this requirement below is for web, not web

> and software both right?
>
> Peter Korn wrote (before taking off)
> In the Web & Software subcommittee con-call today, we discussed
> removing the forms and scripting provisions because they are covered
> by our other provisions. In order to ensure that people reading the
> standard don't inadvertently think that forms & script-generated pages

> aren't covered, I suggest we simply note them in provision 6.1.I.
>
> Therefore, I suggest the new 6.1.I be:
>
> "For all user interface components, including form elements and those
> generated by scripts, the name and role shall be programmatically
> determinable, states, properties, and values that can be set by the
> user shall be programmatically determinable and can be
> programmatically set, and notification of changes to these items is
> available to user agents, including assistive technologies. For
> example: 1. Frames shall be titled with text that facilitates frame
identification and navigation."
>
> With this addition, we can then comfortably remove 6.1.B, which is:
>
> "When electronic forms are used, the form shall allow people using
> assistive technology to access the information, field elements, and
> functionality required for completion and submission of the form,
> including all directions and cues."
>
> And we can further remove 6.1.C., which is:
>
> "When pages utilize scripting languages to display content, or to
> create interface elements, the information provided by the script
> shall be identified with functional text that can be read by assistive

> technology."
>
>

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