Thread Subject: Fwd: Re: Proposal (updated 27 June) on authoring tools

From: Judy Brewer
Date: Wed, Jun 27 2007 12:45 PM

• 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

Alternative versions of #1 and #3 below, incorporating some minor tweaks
from recent comments.

#1a. For each accessible content format supported, authoring tools must
allow the author to produce content, including any content generated
without requiring author input, that complies with applicable Section 508
provisions.

#3a: For authoring tools with a user interface, authoring tools must
provide a mode of operation which prompts authors to create accessible
content; and either a mode which assists authors in assessing content for
Section 508 compliance, or interoperability with evaluation tools that
provide that function.

- Judy

>Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 11:28:16 -0400
>To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>From: Judy Brewer < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Proposal (updated 27 June) on authoring
> tools
>
>Hi Don,
>
>At 10:16 AM 6/27/2007 -0400, Barrett, Don wrote:
> >These look great; a couple of quick thoughts.
> >
> >For number 1. Can we do a definition of programmatic sources?
>
> From previous thread
>http://teitac.org/mailarchives/mail_message.php?id=5441&listid=3
>see definition of "programmatically determined" from WCAG 2.0:
>http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#programmaticallydetermineddef
>
>which defines this as:
> "determined by software from author-supplied data provided in a way
>that different user agents, including assistive technologies, can extract
>and present this information to users in different modalities"
>
>and which includes the following examples:
> "Determined in a mark-up language from elements and attributes that
>are accessed directly by commonly available assistive technology."
>and
> "Determined from technology-specific data structures in a non-mark-up
>language and exposed to assistive technology via an accessibility API that
>is supported by commonly available assistive technology."
>
>Our previous language for this provision in this Web/software thread used a
>different formulation of this concept, which might require less
>explanation, if it is sufficiently precise for this authoring provision,
>perhaps we should return to that:
> "...any content that can be generated by the tool without requiring
>author input"
>
> >For number 2, Can we add a "such as" clause after "accessibility
> >information" , e.g., such as table headers, labels for images, . . .
>
>I've been wondering about the inclusion of this type of example information
>in our provisions. I'd tried it w/ the 20 June version of the provision on
>"pre-authored content" because of the recurring questions on that item...
>
>[draft of that provision from last week was "Authoring tools with a user
>interface must provide templates that
>facilitate production of accessible content, and pre-authored content (such
>as buttons and form components) that is accessible."]
>
>...however I'd gotten the impression from some discussion that it was
>better to leave examples out of the main provisions. I agree with you that
>clarifications of what we mean by "accessibility information" in provision
>#2 may be needed, given the questions that have come up about this
>provision on the list. Can someone clarify what our general practice in the
>TEITAC provisions will be regarding explanatory text included in or
>following any of the provisions, so that we can be consistent with that
>practice?
>
> >For number 3, do we need a definition for "interoperability?" If no
> >tools exist, we at least need to know what it means for the authoring
> >tool to potentially have interoperability.
>
>I'm looking for that. I note that the ATAG 2.0 Working Draft use
>"interoperability" and "interoperate" a number of times without defining
>them. UAAG 1.0 does the same. WCAG 2.0 Working Draft addresses a related
>concept partly through the principle of robustness -- though via the
>perspective of interpretation of content -- as "...interpreted reliably by
>a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies." Can we
>include this as is, or include it provisionally and continue to work on a
>definition?
>
>Regards,
>
>- Judy
>
> >
> >Don
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> >[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Judy
> >Brewer
> >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:03 AM
> >To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> >Subject: [teitac-websoftware] Proposal (updated 27 June) on authoring
> >tools
> >
> >This proposal incorporates additional suggestions and combines some
> >provisions.
> >
> >(Specific notes: #1 combines 1 & previous 3 using Allen's language
> >following list discussion; #2 already received provisional approval; #3
> >combines previous 4 & a version of 5 that allowed meeting evaluation
> >goals by interoperability; #4 updates previous 6 with suggestions
> >received; "giving prominence to" is dropped in this set; "Web" is
> >dropped in this version of the definition of authoring tools as there
> >has been no negative feedback on that question.)
> >
> >#1. For each accessible content format supported, authoring tools must
> >allow the author to produce content, including content derived from
> >programmatic sources, that meets applicable electronic content
> >accessibility standards.
> >
> >#2. Authoring tools must preserve accessibility information necessary
> >for meeting the electronic content provisions, unless the user
> >explicitly indicates otherwise.
> >
> >#3. For authoring tools with a user interface, authoring tools must
> >provide a mode which prompts authors to create accessible content; and
> >either a mode which assists authors in checking for accessibility
> >problems, or interoperability with evaluation tools that provide that
> >function.
> >
> >#4. Authoring tools which provide pre-authored content, or templates to
> >facilitate production of content, must provide at least one version that
> >meets applicable electronic content accessibility standards.
> >
> >[DEFINITION] "Authoring Tool" means "...any software, or collection of
> >software components, that authors use to create or modify content for
> >publication."
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >- 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
> >
> >

• Next message in Thread: None
• Previous message in Thread: None