Thread Subject: Re: Authoring Tools -- Wiki section added

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: Peter Korn
Date: Wed, Jul 25 2007 2:20 PM

Hi guys,

I took the action item to start a discussion on defining "publication"
for use in the definition of "authoring tool". But I wonder if we can
simply drop "publication", just as we have dropped "author", in the
suggestion by the other Peter, below.

How about we just go with, as Peter suggests, "Authoring Tool: any
software, or collection of software components, used to create or modify
content."

While we still need a definition of content, we don't need a definition
of publication anymore.


Regards,

Peter Korn
Accessibility Architect,
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

> My thoughts on three of these, the first of which was already covered
> on the phonecall:
> *"Authoring Tool: any software, or collection of software
> components, that authors use to create or modify content for publication."*
> I'd like to see 'authors' dropped from that, and wouldn't mind seeing
> some slight rewording of 'content for publication' as others also
> raised. My fear is that this could be interpreted as only applying to
> a tool that creates 'simple' or non-interactive content. How about:
> "Authoring Tool: any software, or collection of software components, used to create or modify content."
> I am fine with 'authors' appearing in the actual provisions, though I
> suppose they could be tweaked as well (one already uses 'users').
>
> *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.*
>
> 'interoperability with evaluation tools' concerns me. If we have to provide some kind of 'tight' interoperability with third party tools, it raises the exact same problem we have with AT-IT interoperability: where are the standards that define this? And this might trigger licensing issues, raising the cost for everyone.
>
> *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.
>
> *A comment was made that 'at least one' was not sufficient, but as a software vendor I am in a far better position to make something accessible if I can focus on a single solution. And if multiple solutions are provided, I can't figure out how their differences could be meaningfully explained to an audience which is generally described as not being 'accessibility experts'.
>
>
> Peter Wallack
> Accessibility Program Director
> Oracle Corporation
>
>
> Judy Brewer wrote:
>> I have added a section collecting our discussions to date on provisions for
>> authoring tools to the Web/Software Wiki:
>> http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:General_issues#Authoring_Tools
>> This includes the latest version of the proposal, from June 27; the
>> proposal threads in the mail archive; and links to our recent discussion
>> minutes.
>>
>> At our meeting today, let's review the June 27 proposal, starting with the
>> definition, then the four provisions. For those provisions not yet ready to
>> move forward, it would be helpful to identify specifically what the pending
>> issues are, so that those can be addressed and resolved over the next two
>> weeks.
>>
>> Proposed definition:
>>
>> "Authoring Tool: any software, or collection of software
>> components, that authors use to create or modify content for publication."
>>
>> Proposed provisions:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Any specific remaining concerns for discussion -- in which case also
>> suggestions for how to resolve those concerns?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> - Judy
>>
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

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