E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 4 (In chronological order)

From: Julie Lewis
Date: Mon, Nov 30 2015 8:07AM
Subject: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 128, Issue 19
No previous message | Next message →

Is there any reason the accessibility community can¹t use github for this?
We could even maintain a plain language version of the WCAG
recommendations there. ;^)

>
>2. The accessibility community should build and maintain an
>application any Web professional can use to discover known
>techniques for producing usable and accessible interactions in
>the presentation technology they are using. The same application
>would allow developers to submit new techniques they have used to
>solve a previously unsolved problem or to improve upon an
>existing solution. Each technique submitted should be specific;
>include appropriate examples of its implementation; be tagged
>according to the interface or interaction (form, text input,
>error checking, labels for fieldsets, navigation menus, and so
>on), the presentation technology (HTML, PDF, XHTML, Word for
>Windows, Open Office, Drupal, WordPress, Plone, Bootstrap.js, and
>so on), the presentation environments in which it works (video,
>audio, wearables, smart phones, large monitors, haptic
>interfaces, and others), the disability addressed, the relevant
>WCAG success criteria, and other relevant features if I've missed
>any; and be linked to closely related solutions, relevant
>tutorials, explanations of the underlying principles, and the
>like.

From: Cliff Tyllick
Date: Mon, Nov 30 2015 8:19AM
Subject: Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 128, Issue 19
← Previous message | Next message →

Julie, it would have to be hosted by an entity that nations, their courts, and corporations would recognize as being authoritative. Otherwise, it's just some group's notion of best practices—not a resource for ensuring compliance with laws or conformance to standards.

So who hosts it is far more important than how it's hosted.

Cliff Tyllick

Sent from my iPhone
Although its spellcheck often saves me, all goofs in sent messages are its fault.

> On Nov 30, 2015, at 9:07 AM, Julie Lewis < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> Is there any reason the accessibility community can¹t use github for this?
> We could even maintain a plain language version of the WCAG
> recommendations there. ;^)
>
>>
>> 2. The accessibility community should build and maintain an
>> application any Web professional can use to discover known
>> techniques for producing usable and accessible interactions in
>> the presentation technology they are using. The same application
>> would allow developers to submit new techniques they have used to
>> solve a previously unsolved problem or to improve upon an
>> existing solution. Each technique submitted should be specific;
>> include appropriate examples of its implementation; be tagged
>> according to the interface or interaction (form, text input,
>> error checking, labels for fieldsets, navigation menus, and so
>> on), the presentation technology (HTML, PDF, XHTML, Word for
>> Windows, Open Office, Drupal, WordPress, Plone, Bootstrap.js, and
>> so on), the presentation environments in which it works (video,
>> audio, wearables, smart phones, large monitors, haptic
>> interfaces, and others), the disability addressed, the relevant
>> WCAG success criteria, and other relevant features if I've missed
>> any; and be linked to closely related solutions, relevant
>> tutorials, explanations of the underlying principles, and the
>> like.
>
> > > >

From: Julie Lewis
Date: Tue, Dec 01 2015 2:10PM
Subject: Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 129, Issue 1
← Previous message | Next message →

>>
>>From: Cliff Tyllick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On Nov 30, 2015, at 9:07 AM, Julie Lewis < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>Is there any reason the accessibility community can¹t use github for
>>>>>this?
>>>>>We could even maintain a plain language version of the WCAG
>>>>>recommendations there. ;^)
>>>>>>2. The accessibility community should build and maintain an
>>>>>>application any Web professional can use to discover known
>>>>>>techniques for producing usable and accessible interactions in
>>>>>>the presentation technology they are using.
>>
>>>Julie, it matters who hosts it because the host is the entity that
>>>affirms that these are valid solutions. If it's produced by everyone on
>>>this list collaborating as friends of mine, then the attorneys who
>>>opine on whether a corporation is protected from the risk of having
>>>done the wrong thing will say, "Well, that's interesting, but it's just
>>>what Cliff's friends say. What does the body that made the standards
>>>say?"
>>>
>>>But if the very same people do the very same work as a working group of
>>>the WAI, those attorneys will say, "Yes, our developers and project
>>>managers can adequately reduce our risk by using these tools, because
>>>the body that developed the standards also developed these tools."
>>
>>

OK maybe I wasn't clear. You talk about "the accessibility community"
developing and maintaining a tool. (That doesn't sound "authoritative" to
me.) In fact that tool already exists.

It is possible to create and host your own github repository - many
private companies use it this way for source control. But then I think
you lose the visibility and "street cred" that github has with developers.
And it costs $.

Either way - you set up the project so that one or more people act as
gatekeepers for any code or documentation, that someone wants to add to
the repository. WAI - or whatever organization is deemed authoritative -
would create the project and set themselves up as gatekeeper(s).

Even better - github lets anyone "clone" the project so they have a local
copy that they can do whatever they need to with. That is what it is made
for. If they make improvements, they can request that the improvements be
reviewed by WAI - who can either accept and add them to the master, or
reject them for whatever reason. All documented, all done in the open.

My point is that "hosting" is different from "control". The tool can be
hosted anywhere, what is important is who controls what gets added to the
repository.

And note message 12. WCAG is already using github for the spec.

From: Cliff Tyllick
Date: Tue, Dec 01 2015 2:43PM
Subject: Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 129, Issue 1
← Previous message | No next message

Thanks for the clarification! That github makes it easy for others to use the documentation as a starting point for their own version, either expanded or streamlined, is particularly attractive. Julie, I'll follow up with you off line.

Maybe if I can create a working example, WAI will react with more enthusiasm and less puzzlement. 😀

Cliff

Sent from my iPhone
Although its spellcheck often saves me, all goofs in sent messages are its fault.

On Dec 1, 2015, at 3:10 PM, Julie Lewis < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

>>>
>>> From: Cliff Tyllick < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 30, 2015, at 9:07 AM, Julie Lewis < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Is there any reason the accessibility community can¹t use github for
>>>>>> this?
>>>>>> We could even maintain a plain language version of the WCAG
>>>>>> recommendations there. ;^)
>>>>>>> 2. The accessibility community should build and maintain an
>>>>>>> application any Web professional can use to discover known
>>>>>>> techniques for producing usable and accessible interactions in
>>>>>>> the presentation technology they are using.
>>>
>>>> Julie, it matters who hosts it because the host is the entity that
>>>> affirms that these are valid solutions. If it's produced by everyone on
>>>> this list collaborating as friends of mine, then the attorneys who
>>>> opine on whether a corporation is protected from the risk of having
>>>> done the wrong thing will say, "Well, that's interesting, but it's just
>>>> what Cliff's friends say. What does the body that made the standards
>>>> say?"
>>>>
>>>> But if the very same people do the very same work as a working group of
>>>> the WAI, those attorneys will say, "Yes, our developers and project
>>>> managers can adequately reduce our risk by using these tools, because
>>>> the body that developed the standards also developed these tools."
>
> OK maybe I wasn't clear. You talk about "the accessibility community"
> developing and maintaining a tool. (That doesn't sound "authoritative" to
> me.) In fact that tool already exists.
>
> It is possible to create and host your own github repository - many
> private companies use it this way for source control. But then I think
> you lose the visibility and "street cred" that github has with developers.
> And it costs $.
>
> Either way - you set up the project so that one or more people act as
> gatekeepers for any code or documentation, that someone wants to add to
> the repository. WAI - or whatever organization is deemed authoritative -
> would create the project and set themselves up as gatekeeper(s).
>
> Even better - github lets anyone "clone" the project so they have a local
> copy that they can do whatever they need to with. That is what it is made
> for. If they make improvements, they can request that the improvements be
> reviewed by WAI - who can either accept and add them to the master, or
> reject them for whatever reason. All documented, all done in the open.
>
> My point is that "hosting" is different from "control". The tool can be
> hosted anywhere, what is important is who controls what gets added to the
> repository.
>
> And note message 12. WCAG is already using github for the spec.
>
> > > >