Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group
Issues for Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines Techniques
This document provides a guide to issues which are yet to be resolved, as well
as those which have already been resolved, by the Authoring Tools Accessibility Guidelines Working
Group (AUWG). It will be maintained through the life of the Authoring Tool
Accessibility Guidelines Techniques document, and updated regularly as new issues
are raised or resolved. It will draw issues and resolution from meetings of
the Working Group or from the email list (w3c-wai-au@w3.org).
Unresolved Issues
- Technique categories: Icons
- Technique categories: Adding a fifth category of tools (Conversion
Tools)
- Technique categories: Which category definitions to use?
- How will AERT be integrated with ATAG 4.1, 4.2?
- When ATAG 1.3 says "markup" does this include other
non-tag content?
- Is ATAG 3.1 reworking (classes of equivalents) acceptable?
- Use of "Required" vs. "Highly Recommended"
to describe techniques.
- How to handle real-time editing.
Resolved Issues
Issues raised before last call:
- Technique categories: Categorizing techniques by tool type
or functionality type?
Unresolved Issues
Issues raised before last call:
1. Technique categories: Icons
2. Technique categories: Adding a fifth category
of tools (Conversion Tools)
3. Technique categories: Which category definitions
to use?
4. How will AERT be integrated with ATAG 4.1, 4.2?
5. When ATAG 1.3 says "markup" does this include
other non-tag content?
- Raised: F2F,
Cannes
- Resolved:
6. Is ATAG 3.1 reworking (classes of equivalents) acceptable?
- Raised: F2F,
Cannes
- Resolved:
7. Use of "Required" vs. "Highly Recommended"
to describe techniques.
- Raised: F2F,
Cannes
- Resolved:
8. How to handle real-time editing?
- Raised: F2F,
Cannes
- Resolved:
Resolved Issues:
Last updated 22 March, 2002 by Jan Richards (jan.richards@utoronto.ca)