Thread Subject: Fwd: Authoring tools: Definition, and advisory note for prompts

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: Judy Brewer
Date: Wed, Oct 17 2007 12:20 PM

During our discussion of the definition of authoring tools and
prompting in our October 17 teleconference, we made the following
further refinements to the advisory notes for the following
provisions. These advisory notes will be submitted into the upcoming
draft unless there are objections to the new wording. Furthermore, we
discussed a potential ambiguity in the provision for accessible
templates, and an update on that is provided below.

DEFINITION OF AUTHORING TOOLS:
Authoring Tools: any software intended to create or modify content
for publication.
[Advisory Note] 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 enabled to support compliance with the
user interface and content provisions."
[question for EWG] is "in that format" or "in that format for
publication" necessary?

PROMPTING:
Authoring tools with a user interface must provide a mode which
prompts authors to create accessible content.
[Advisory Note] It is neither expected nor possible that prompts be
available for every type of accessible content.
[Note to Access Board] The committee recommends that advisory
techniques be available and linked from this provision regarding how
to provide guidance on effective methods of prompting as well as
techniques to avoid.

TEMPLATES:
Authoring tools which provide pre-authored content, or templates to
facilitate production of content, must provide at least one version
that meets applicable Section 508 provisions.
[Note to Access Board] This provision may need two further
clarifications, which could be in the form of advisory notes, to the
effect that (1) this provision should not be applied to formats which
are not enabled for accessibility support, and that (2) this
provision is not intended to require an accessible template for every
template that is packaged with an authoring tool, but neither is it
intended to imply that where there are many different types of
templates with unique features, only one accessible template would be provided.

- Judy

>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:16:09 -0400
>To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>From: Judy Brewer < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>Subject: Fwd: Authoring tools: Definition, and advisory note for prompts
>
>We further discussed the authoring tool definition and prompts on
>October 3 2007.
>- Notes from that discussion are available at:
>
>http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_October_03#Authoring_Tools_Provisions
>- An emailed message with options for consideration was sent October
>3 and is available below in this message.
>
>
>1. With regard to the DEFINITION OF AUTHORING TOOLS, among the
>emailed-list of approaches (see forwarded thread below) the
>preference was for a definition with the following format and wording:
> "Any software intended to create or modify content for publication"
>with an advisory note that would inclusive by function (not by
>tool-type), e.g.
> "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."
>
>
>2. With regard to PROMPTING, the provision and the proposed advisory
>text from last time was:
>"Authoring tools with a user interface must provide a mode which
>prompts authors to create accessible content."
>[Advisory] "It is neither expected nor possible that prompts be
>available for every type of accessible content."
>
>Our discussion included suggestions for further expanding the
>advisory note to scope down the expectation, and providing advice
>through techniques for approaches that work well and that don't work well.
>
>On further consideration, I note that the language "It is neither
>expected nor possible..." appears to rather stringently rein-in
>expectations for the scope of the prompting, and I'm unable to come
>up with better wording.
>
>As for providing techniques, can we add "[NOTE] The committee
>recommends that advisory techniques be available and linked from
>this provision, to provide guidance on effective methods of
>prompting, as well as techniques to avoid."
>
>Regards,
>
>- Judy
>
>
>Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 11:54:04 -0400
>>To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>From: Judy Brewer < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>Subject: Authoring tools: Definition, and advisory note for prompts
>>
>>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
>>http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_September_26#Authoring_Tool
>>s (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
>>for publication;controversial]
>>
>>Which approach gets us to a clear definition of authoring tools for
>>this context?
>>
>>
>>(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."
>>

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