Thread Subject: Re: Authoring tools with no user interface
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: Tue, Aug 14 2007 2:25 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: None
- Previous message in thread: Andrew Kirkpatrick: "Re: Authoring tools with no user interface"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
Thanks for the further elaboration on this.
I think the language which we developed to address that, "...for each
accessible content format supported" works fine, and that we should keep it.
At 10:40 AM 8/14/2007 +0100, Sean Hayes wrote:
>We should remove the qualifiers "for each accessible content format
>supported" as all content covers all scenarios,
>I believe that this was added to account for situations where for instance
>the output might be something other than electronic content, for instance,
>a printed format. Sean, didn't this come from you, and if so can you
>Yes the problem here is that authoring systems often provide the ability
>to export into formats which are not able to pass all the content requirements.
>Some examples: Creating a FAX document for transmission. Creating an image
>of the content to include in an advertisement. Creating a thumbnail for
>use as a web preview. Saving as simple text to migrate content between
>If we prevent authoring tools from supporting these scenarios, this will
>cause a lot of problems in the market. On the other hand we do want to
>make sure that where the tool is saving to a format that can pass the
>provisions, the necessary information is added appropriately.
>I'm not sure what the right language is here, but that is my concern.
>Accessibility Business Unit
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: Andrew Kirkpatrick: "Re: Authoring tools with no user interface"