Thread Subject: Authoring Tools -- checking definition & provisions
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: Wed, Aug 15 2007 10:05 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Daniela Marghitu: "Re: Authoring Tools -- checking definition & provisions"
- Previous message in thread: None
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
I've updated the Wiki area on authoring tools again to reflect our
discussion at yesterday's (Aug 14) teleconference, and discussion questions
for our Aug 15 teleconference. You can find the latest version of the
definition, and the provisions, at:
In addition, given the heavy (!!) traffic on the list recently, I'm pasting
in the relevant bits below, so they're handy for our discussion today.
Definition of authoring tools: "Authoring Tool: any software used to create
or modify content for publication."
+ Proposed clarification for discussion Aug 15: (Note:
this is my attempt to capture the status of the discussion so far; if I've
missed something, please help out.) If we were to use an inclusive
clarification reflecting the language we removed yesterday (e.g., "'any
software' is intended to mean 'any software, or collection of software
components', we have not solved the problems inherent in a developer
potentially needing to provide conformance statements for an entire chain
of software components, some of which they might have no control over. If
instead we were to use a non-exclusive clarification (e.g., either "'any
software' can refer to more than stand-alone authoring products" or "'any
software' can refer to multiple software components," -- or better
clarification language if someone can propose that), does this
clarification help? For instance, does it enable a developer to claim
accessibility support in related products that are part of an authoring
chain, and a purchaser to be able to determine what useful level of support
for production of accessible content would be available from products that
they might purchase? Or is this not what people's concerns were? I think it
bears having some brief discussion in our August 15 teleconference, but if
neither of such clarifications clearly helps the definition, perhaps it is
also better to leave this clarification for after the Aug 17 draft, or
possibly to just let the definition stand alone. Thoughts?
Provisions relating to authoring tool support for production of accessible
content: (I'm only including here the ones still open for discussion. See
Wiki page for the rest.)
3. For authoring tools with a user interface, authoring tools must
provide a mode which prompts authors to create accessible content. (Note:
this is the first half of the re-split provision which we agreed to try.
4. For authoring tools with a user interface, authoring tools must
either provide a mode which assists authors in checking for accessibility
problems, or compatability with evaluation tools that provide that
function. (Note: this is the second half of the re-split provision which we
agreed to try. Work OK?)(Note: after Aug 17, further discuss and write up a
rationale explaining what is meant by "compatability with...")
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: Daniela Marghitu: "Re: Authoring Tools -- checking definition & provisions"
- Previous message in Thread: None