Thread Subject: Re: More thoughts on 1194.21(g) (now3.2-C User Preferences)

From: Katie Haritos-Shea
Date: Wed, Jul 11 2007 8:10 AM

• 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: More thoughts on 1194.21(g) (now 3.2-C User Preferences)"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

Yes David,

I think we were talking about "user rendering settings", "User interface settings", or something along those lines. It was meant to cover more than display attributes that covered other sensory modalities.

Katie

-----Original Message-----
>From: David Poehlman < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Sent: Jul 11, 2007 9:32 AM
>To: Katie Haritos-Shea < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >, TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Cc: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] More thoughts on 1194.21(g) (now3.2-C User Preferences)
>
>I don't class these as display attributes.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Katie Haritos-Shea" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>To: "TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >;
>< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Cc: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 3:23 PM
>Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] More thoughts on 1194.21(g) (now3.2-C User
>Preferences)
>
>
>The discussion of "other display attributes defined by the platform"
>centered around being sure to cover possible future tactile, aural and other
>sense (smell, etc) user selected setting.
>
>Katie Haritos-Shea
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Andi Snow-Weaver < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>Sent: Jul 10, 2007 2:50 PM
>>To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>Cc: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] More thoughts on 1194.21(g) (now 3.2-C
>>User Preferences)
>>
>>
>>How can we close on this?
>>
>>Peter proposed:
>>
>>July 6th draft: Applications must utilize user selected contrast and color
>>selections and other individual display attributes when the availability of
>>those selections are developed and documented according to industry
>>standards.
>>
>>Peter proposed: Applications shall utilize the user selected contrast and
>>color selections and other individual display attributes defined by the
>>platform they are running on.
>>
>>Sean expressed concern that
>>- "other display attributes defined by the platform" is too broad, and
>>- applications should not be prevented from overriding system settings but
>>rather should be required to have a mode that respects them
>>
>>Peter responded with an updated proposal:
>>Applications shall have a mode that utilizes the user selected contrast and
>>color selections and other individual display attributes defined by the
>>platform they are running on.
>>
>>And we have discussed in another thread including the visual vocus
>>indicator in the list of display attributes.
>>
>>Maybe we should just delete "and other individual display attributes"? What
>>else is there that is really critical for accessibility that we should add
>>to the list? Font? Font size?
>>
>>Next proposal: Applications shall have a mode that utilizes the platform
>>user settings for contrast, color, font, font size, and cursor appearance.
>>
>>Andi
>>
>>

• Next message in Thread: None
• Previous message in Thread: David Poehlman: "Re: More thoughts on 1194.21(g) (now 3.2-C User Preferences)"