Thread Subject: Re: Viewpoint Opinion: 7-D Accessible Templates
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: Fri, Mar 28 2008 4:00 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: None
- Previous message in thread: Michele Budris: "Re: Viewpoint Opinion: 7-D Accessible Templates"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
At 10:36 AM 3/28/2008 -0600, Michele Budris wrote:
>Thank you for your input. We will be including your comments, but we
>will not be include the last paragraph as it is proposing new text.
Not a problem. The wording error that I addressed in my comment is
not present in the version of this provision that is available on the
Wiki, so the last paragraph of my comment is not needed.
>On Mar 27, 2008, at 9:55 PM, Judy Brewer wrote:
> > Viewpoint Opinion: 7-D Accessible Templates
> > Reference:
> > <http://teitac.org/wiki/EWG:OpenProvisions_March_12#7-D_- >
> > Accessible templates and accessible pre-authored content provided
> > with authoring tools can be highly effective in facilitating
> > conformance to a variety of electronic content provisions. Authoring
> > tool vendors know their tools better than their customers and can
> > more efficiently develop sample templates and pre-authored content,
> > which can help model how to use the tool's features in ways that
> > support accessible content provisions.
> > A significant concern with the wording of this provision however was
> > apparently a potential ambiguity with the scoping of the provision,
> > due to the phrasing "...at least one version that meets applicable
> > Section 508 provisions," even with the accompanying note that this
> > does not require an accessible template for every template that is
> > packaged with an authoring tool." In other words, it could be
> > interpreted as requiring only one template in all, which would not
> > have significant benefit; or conversely it could be interpreted as
> > requiring very many accessible templates. Further discussion would be
> > needed to arrive at appropriate scoping of the requirement.
> > Because of time constraints in the final TEITAC meeting, the
> > following clarification could not be offered, which was that the
> > wording of the provision itself should have repeated "templates or
> > set of pre-authored content" instead of just "templates" following
> > "at least one..." With the corrected wording, the provision would
> > read: "Authoring tools which provide pre-authored content, or
> > templates to facilitate production of content, must provide at least
> > one template or set of pre-authored content that meets applicable
> > Section 508 provisions."
> > Regards,
> > - Judy
> > --
> > 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: None
- Previous message in Thread: Michele Budris: "Re: Viewpoint Opinion: 7-D Accessible Templates"