Thread Subject: Authoring tools: Definition, and advisory note for prompts
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, Oct 03 2007 9:55 AM
- 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
We made more headway last week on authoring tools;
proposals were at http://teitac.org/mailarchives/mail_thread.php?thread=1586
and discussion is at
(see status summary at the bottom of that section).
Proposals for the definition, and a clarifying note on prompting, follow.
(1) DEFINITION OF AUTHORING TOOLS
Several of us have been discussing the definition of authoring tools
since last week, including looking at many different types of tools
that could be considered authoring tools, to see whether we thought
that it could make sense to include them under the umbrella of
authoring tool provisions in TEITAC. We do not have a single proposal
yet, but it would be helpful to get feedback on three different
directions that we could take in wrapping up the definition of authoring tools:
a. "Any software intended to create or modify content for
publication" plus an inclusive advisory note calling out intended
types of tools, for example: "This is intended to include tools such
as content management systems, Web development tools, word
processors, presentation tools, and multimedia editors" or
alternatively, calling out intended functions of tools, for example:
"This is intended to include only tools where the software is able to
create or modify content in that format for publication, and the
format is accessibility supported."
b. "Any software intended to create or modify content for
publication" plus an exclusive advisory note excluding some
tool-types, e.g. "This is not intended to cover tools where the
format is not accessibility supported, or the software is not able to
create or modify content in that format for publication."
ii: the format is accessibility supported;
iii: the software provides specific support for the features of the
content format." [note however that this third provision is
c. A more complex definition, such as:
"Authoring tool: Software is considered an authoring tool for a
content format or set of formats if:
i: the software is able to create or modify content in that format
Which approach gets us to a clear definition of authoring tools for
(2) 8.2-C: PROMPTS "Authoring tools with a user interface must
provide a mode which prompts authors to create accessible content."
We agreed that this needed clarification. Would inclusion of the
following advisory note address the concerns that have been raised?
[Advisory] "It is neither expected nor possible that prompts be
available for every type of accessible content."
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: None