W3C

List of comments on “Understanding WCAG 2.0 (Public Review Draft)” (dated 21 June 2011)

Quick access to

There are 7 comments (sorted by their types, and the section they are about).

question comments

Comment LC-2545: Situation B: Colors for stacked bar chart
Commenter: Makoto Ueki <makoto.ueki@gmail.com> on behalf of JIS (archived message)
Context: Use of Color: Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.1
Resolution status:

Will SC 1.4.1 be applied to a stacked bar chart?

For example, a stacked bar chart shows two items by using two different colors. There are the graph legends near the chart which explains what is represented by each bar and color. The patterns are not used.

It might depend on the colors used in the chart. If the colors are black and white, will SC 1.4.1 be applied to the image of the stacked bar chart?

In that case, the color differences are used to convey information within non-text content. However the patterns are not necessarily needed to convey the same information in a manner that does not depend on color. Because black and white has sufficient contrast ratio and brightness difference.

Does SC 1.4.1 require the authors to include patterns to any combination of colors?

If yes, could you explain the reason why the patterns are needed for black and white?

Proposed Change:
Need an answer from WCAG WG in order to harmonize JIS and WCAG 2.0.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-2546: Embedded Flash content
Commenter: Makoto Ueki <makoto.ueki@gmail.com> on behalf of JIS (archived message)
Context: Pause, Stop, Hide: Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.2
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Flash animation is embedded in a HTML web page. The animation has five screens. It starts automatically, lasts more than five seconds, and is presented in parallel with other content. It also has five buttons to stop the animation. When each button receive focus, the movement of the animation will be paused.

Is this considered to be "a mechanism for the user to pause" the animation?

The point is that it might not be obvious for users to understand that the buttons are the mechanism.

Example:
http://www.fujitsu.com/us/

Proposed Change:
Need an answer from WCAG WG to harmonize JIS with WCAG 2.0.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

general comment comments

Comment LC-2552: Appendix A: Minor additional pointer
Commenter: Shawn Henry <hawn@w3.org> (archived message)
Context: Appendix A: How to refer to WCAG 2.0 from other documents
Not assigned
Resolution status:

We now have additional information on generally referencing and linking to WAI technical documents. Ideally we'd spend some time to integrate these better; however, I don't think it's worth the time. Instead I propose one little addition to this appendix. Thanks. (I added a a link to this appendix from that document.)

Proposed Change:
Add to the beginning: For additional guidance, see <a href="http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/linking.html">Referencing and Linking to WAI Guidelines and Technical Documents</a>.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

substantive comments

Comment LC-2532: Need (or not) for text equivalent of AV files
Commenter: Maria Moore <maria.moore@utas.edu.au> (archived message)
Context: Audio-only and Video-only (Prerecorded): Understanding Success Criterion 1.2.1
Not assigned
Resolution status:

I am a bit unclear about the note on http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/media-equiv-av-only-alt.html, that says /Note: /A text equivalent is not required for audio that is provided as an equivalent for video with no audio information. For example, it is not required to caption video description that is provided as an alternative to a silent movie.
> Surely this does not assist deaf-blind people? I would have thought that a text equivalent would be needed.

Proposed Change:
Providing an audio description of video only creates another file (the audio description), that needs a text equivalent
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-2548: Guideline 1.3 covering the needs of people with low vision
Commenter: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> (archived message)
Context: Understanding Guideline 1.3: Create content that can be presented in diffe...
Dear WCAG WG,

There have been some issues raised around WCAG 2.0's coverage of the needs of people with low vision. At a minimum, coverage under Guideline 1.3 needs to be clarified in the Understanding document.

Additionally, we have been re-looking closely at Guideline 1.3 and Success Criterion 1.3.1 along with their corresponding sections in the Understanding document and feel that it is important to revisit this issue.

So this is a brief comment to request that we have further discussion, before the updated version of the Techniques and Understanding documents are published.

Specifics to follow. Thanks in advance.

~Shawn
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-2513: Conflict between alternative options 1-4 and F69
Commenter: Detlev Fischer <fischer@dias.de> (archived message)
Context: Resize text: Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.2
assigned to Adam Solomon
Resolution status:

The "How to meet" document offers four alternative options to meet SC 1.4.4 (Resize Text), one of them simply "G142: Using a technology that has commonly-available user agents that support zoom". F69, on the other hand, describes the failure of clipping , truncating or obscuring text when applying text-only magnification to 200%. It seems that the How to meet" document should link support for page zoom to a (perhaps more modest) support for text-only zoom. Just affording page zoom (this works nearly always without any extra effort) does not prevent the failure 69 when scaling text only.

Proposed Change:
Change logic in the "How to meet" document: G142 alone is not good enough. In addition, text-only resizing must also work to ensure a pass of F69.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

editorial comments

Comment LC-2573: Editorial changes to Understanding Conformance
Commenter: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> (archived message)
Context: Understanding Conformance (Level of Assistive Technology Support Needed for "Accessibility Support")
Not assigned
Resolution status:

Under Level of Assistive Technology Support Needed for "Accessibility Support" list item 1 says: Accessibility support of Web technologies varies by environment
- In a company where all employees are provided with particular user agents and assistive technologies, Web technologies may need to only be supported by those user agents and older assistive technologies.
- Content posted to the public Web may need to work with a broader range of user agents and assistive technologies.
"

I think the "older" is incorrect in the first bullet. I think it should be deleted. (because the point is that if users are known to have certain AT, then you do *not* have to support older AT, yes?)

To further clarify, consider adding it to the second sub-point.

Proposed Change:
...Web technologies may need to only be supported by those user agents and assistive technologies.

Content posted to the public Web may need to work with a broader range of user agents and assistive technologies, including older versions.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Add a comment.


Developed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org).
$Id: Overview.php,v 1.46 2013-10-04 08:11:33 dom Exp $
Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to w3t-sys.org