W3C

(Draft) ATAG 2.0 Implementation Report

22 April 2013

Important Notes:

Numbers of Implementations

Guidelines and Success Criteria

Under each guideline there are success criteria that describe specifically what must be achieved in order to conform. They are similar to the "checkpoints" in ATAG 1.0. Each success criterion is written as a statement that will be either true or false when a specific authoring tool is tested against it.

All ATAG 2.0 success criteria are written to be testable. While some can be tested by software, others require human testers for part or all of the test.

For more information, see the ATAG 2.0 Conformance section.

PART A: Make the authoring tool user interface accessible Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor (v4.1) ATutor LCMS (v2.1) [uses TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin] Defacto CMS [uses TinyMCE, but not Achecker plugin] D2L: Learning Environ-ment [uses TinyMCE, but not Achecker plugin] Drupal 7/8 [uses CKEditor]

(SimplyTest.me)		 WordPress (v3.5) Adobe Dream-weaver CS6 Adobe InDesign CS6 MS Word 2013 Lotus Connect-ions
PRINCIPLE A.1: Authoring tool user interfaces must follow applicable accessibility guidelines Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline A.1.1: (For the authoring tool user interface) Ensure that web-based functionality is accessible. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.1.1.1 Web-Based Accessible (WCAG):

If the authoring tool contains web-based user interfaces, then those web-based user interfaces meet the WCAG 2.0 success criteria. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

Level A: @Several

 Yes
  • Mostly
  • 1.1.1(A): Y
  • 1.2.1(A): Y-Not used
  • 1.2.2(A): Y-Not used
  • 1.2.3(A): Y-Not used
  • 1.3.1(A): Y
  • 1.3.2(A): Y
  • 1.3.3(A):Y
  • 1.4.1(A):Y
  • 1.4.2(A): Y-Not used
  • 2.1.1(A): N due 3rd party Spell Checker (note: alt+F10 is a vital keystroke)
  • 2.1.2(A):Y
  • 2.2.1(A): Y-Not used
  • 2.2.2(A):Y-Not used
  • 2.3.1(A): Y
  • 2.3.2(A): Y
  • 2.4.1(A): Y (esp. in button bars)
  • 2.4.2(A): NA
  • 2.4.3(A): Y
  • 2.4.4(A): Y
  • 3.1.1(A): Y
  • 3.2.1(A): Y
  • 3.2.2(A): Y
  • 3.3.1(A): Y-Not used
  • 3.3.2(A): Y
  • 4.1.1(A):Y
  • 4.1.2(A): Y
 Yes
TinyMCE plus own UI.		 Yes
TinyMCE plus own UI.		 Yes
(doc)		 Probably   N/A N/A N/A  

Level AA: @At-least-one

 Yes
  • Mostly (due to 2.1.1 above)
  • 1.2.4(AA): Y-Not used
  • 1.2.5(AA): Y-Not used
  • 1.4.3(AA):Y
  • 1.4.4(AA):Y
  • 1.4.5(AA):Y
  • 2.4.5(AA): NA
  • 2.4.6(AA): Y
  • 2.4.7(AA): Y
  • 3.1.2(AA): Y
  • 3.2.3(AA): Y
  • 3.2.4(AA): Y
  • 3.3.3(AA): Y-Not used
  • 3.3.4(AA): Y-Not used

Yes
TinyMCE plus own UI

 Yes
A couple error messages to improve, but almost there (assuming that TinyMCE passes).		 Yes
(doc)		 Mostly   N/A N/A N/A  

Level AAA:@None-confirmed
  • No

No

  • 1.2.6(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 1.2.7(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 1.2.8(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 1.2.9(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 1.4.6(AAA): Y
  • 1.4.7(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 1.4.8(AAA): @@@
  • 1.4.9(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 2.1.3(AAA)::Y
  • 2.2.3(AAA): Y
  • 2.2.4(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 2.2.5(AAA): Y-Not used
  • 2.4.8(AAA): NA
  • 2.4.9(AAA): Y
  • 2.4.10(AAA): NA
  • 3.1.3(AAA): @@@
  • 3.1.4(AAA): @@@
  • 3.1.5(AAA): @@@
  • 3.1.6(AAA): @@@
  • 3.2.5(AAA): Y
  • 3.3.5(AAA): N
  • 3.3.6(AAA):Y
 No   Mostly
(doc)
No   N/A N/A N/A  
Guideline A.1.2: (For the authoring tool user interface) Ensure that non-web-based functionality is accessible. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.1.2.1 Accessibility Guidelines:

If the authoring tool contains non-web-based user interfaces, then those non-web-based user interfaces follow user interface accessibility guidelines for the platform. (Level A)

@At-least-one

  • XStandard2.1
  • iPhone apps?
  • Annotate (Steve H)?
 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A          

A.1.2.2 Platform Accessibility Services:

If the authoring tool contains non-web-based user interfaces, then those non-web-based user interfaces expose accessibility information through platform accessibility services. (Level A)

@At-least-one

  • XStandard2.1 (MSAA support)
  • iPhone apps?
  • Annotate (Steve H)?
 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A          
PRINCIPLE A.2: Editing-views must be perceivable Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline A.2.1: (For the authoring tool user interface) Make alternative content available to authors. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.2.1.1 Text Alternatives for Rendered Non-Text Content:

If an editing-view renders non-text content, then any programmatically associated text alternatives for the non-text content can be programmatically determined. (Level A)

 @Several
  • @@ XStandard2.1
 Yes
(via browser)		 Yes
(via browser)		 Yes
(TinyMCE) 		Yes
(via browser)		 ? Yes
(via browser)		   Yes
(via browser)		      

A.2.1.2 Alternatives for Rendered Time-Based Media:

If an editing-view renders time-based media, then at least one of the following is true: (Level A)

  • (a) Option to Render: The authoring tool provides the option to render alternatives for the time-based media; or
  • (b) User Agent Option: Authors have the option to preview the time-based media in a user agent that is able to render the alternatives.

@Several

 Yes
Video can be embedded and displayed via the user agent option (b).		 Yes
Video can be embedded manually and displayed via the user agent option (b).		 Yes
(TinyMCE)		   Yes
Via the user agent option (b). 		Yes
(via browser)		          
Guideline A.2.2: (For the authoring tool user interface) Editing-view presentation can be programmatically determined. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.2.2.1 Editing-View Status Indicators:

If an editing-view adds status indicators to the content being edited, then the status messages being indicated can be programmatically determined. (Level A)

  • Note: Status indicators may indicate errors (e.g., spelling errors), tracked changes, hidden elements, or other information.
 @At-least-one
  • @@WAVE (adds information icons throughout the checked webpage) XMetal? Office2010 spelling?
No.
Some placeholders for elements such as anchors are not properly communic-ated.		 No.
Underlined spelling errors are not communic-ated.		 N/A   No.
Underlined spelling errors are not communic-ated. However there is an accessible alternative checking tool.		 ?       Yes.
Spelling errors are communic-ated via API		  

A.2.2.2 Access to Rendered Text Properties:

If an editing-view renders any text formatting properties that authors can also edit using the editing-view, then the properties can be programmatically determined. (Level AA)

 @Several
  • @@MoodleLMS?, DrupalCMS?, (note: Use MSAA Inspect tool to test on Windows)
 Yes
(via browser)		 Yes
(via browser)		 Yes
(TinyMCE - via browser)		   Yes
(via browser) 		Yes
(via browser)		          
PRINCIPLE A.3: Editing-views must be operable Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline A.3.1: (For the authoring tool user interface) Provide keyboard access to authoring features. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.3.1.1 Keyboard Access (Minimum):

All functionality of the authoring tool is operable through a keyboard interface without requiring specific timings for individual keystrokes, except where the underlying function requires input that depends on the path of the user's movement and not just the endpoints. (Level A)

  • Note 1: Keyboard interfaces are programmatic services provided by many platforms that allow operation in a device independent manner. This success criterion does not imply the presence of a hardware keyboard.
  • Note 2: The path exception relates to the underlying function, not the input technique. For example, if using handwriting to enter text, the input technique (handwriting) requires path-dependent input, but the underlying function (text input) does not. The path exception encompasses other input variables that are continuously sampled from pointing devices, including pressure, speed, and angle.
  • Note 3: This success criterion does not forbid and should not discourage other input methods (e.g., mouse, touch) in addition to keyboard operation.
 @Several
  • @@MS2010? Sakai3.0?
 Yes No.
Spell checker has some issues.		 Yes
(TinyMCE + own UI)		 Yes Yes
(except visual equation editor)		 Yes   Yes      

A.3.1.2 No Keyboard Traps:

If keyboard focus can be moved to a component using a keyboard interface, then focus can be moved away from that component using only a keyboard interface, and, if it requires more than unmodified arrow or tab keys or other standard exit methods, authors are advised of the method for moving focus away. (Level A)

 @Many
  • @@Flash8 MoodleLMS?, DrupalCMS?, (relying on browser for (b))
 Yes Yes Yes
TinyMCE + own UI.		 Yes Yes Yes   Yes   Yes  

A.3.1.3 Efficient Keyboard Access:

The authoring tool user interface includes mechanisms to make keyboard access more efficient than sequential keyboard access. (Level AA)

 @Many
  • @@Flash?
 Yes Yes
e.g. grouped toolbar buttons		 Yes
TinyMCE + own UI.		   Yes Yes   Yes   Yes  

A.3.1.4 Keyboard Access (Enhanced):

All functionality of the authoring tool is operable through a keyboard interface without requiring specific timings for individual keystrokes. (Level AAA)

 

 @Several
  • @@ DrupalCMS? Fluid tools (Decapod coversion, Collection space)
Yes No
Spell checker has some issues.		 Yes
TinyMCE + own UI.		 Yes ?            

A.3.1.5 Customize Keyboard Access:

If the authoring tool includes keyboard commands, then those keyboard commands can be customized. (Level AAA)

 

 @At-least-one
  • MS2010, Web-based tools customized from browser?
No No No   ? No   Yes      

A.3.1.6 Present Keyboard Commands:

If the authoring tool includes keyboard commands,

then the authoring tool provides a way for authors to determine the keyboard commands associated with authoring tool user interface components. (Level AAA)

@Several

  • @@
 N/A No.
e.g. alt-F10		 Yes
But only from accessibility documentation)		   ? No   Yes (underlines access keys in the menus when "alt" key is pressed)   Yes
(when alt is pressed, shortcut keys appear as overlays)		  
Guideline A.3.2: (For the authoring tool user interface) Provide authors with enough time. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.3.2.1 Auto-Save (Minimum):

If the authoring tool includes authoring session time limits, then the authoring tool can be set to automatically save web content edits made using the authoring tool before the session time limits are reached. (Level A)

 @At-least-one
  • @@ATutorLCMS (Scorm mode?)? DrupalCMS? MoodleLMS? Wikis?
 N/A.
Time session limits would be controlled by the higher level application.		 N/A.
Time session limits would be controlled by the higher level application.		 No   Yes
Institutions set time-out limits for inactive users. The system warns users before their session expires and they may re-enter the system without losing content. 		        N/A.
No time limits.		  

 

A.3.2.2 Timing Adjustable:

If a time limit is set by the authoring tool, then at least one of the following is true: (Level A)

  • (a) Turn Off: Authors are allowed to turn off the time limit before encountering it; or
  • (b) Adjust: Authors are allowed to adjust the time limit before encountering it over a wide range that is at least ten times the length of the default setting; or
  • (c) Extend: Authors are warned before time expires and given at least 20 seconds to extend the time limit with a simple action (e.g., "press the space bar"), and authors are allowed to extend the time limit at least ten times; or
  • (d) Real-time Exception: The time limit is a required part of a real-time event (e.g., a collaborative authoring system), and no alternative to the time limit is possible; or
  • (e) Essential Exception: The time limit is essential and extending it would invalidate the activity; or
  • (f) 20 Hour Exception: The time limit is longer than 20 hours.
 @At-least-one
  • @@ATutorLCMS (Scorm mode?)?DrupalCMS?MoodleLMS? Wikis?
 N/A. Time session limits would be controlled by the higher level application. N/A. Time session limits would be controlled by the higher level application. Yes
via (c) extend		   Yes
Institutions set time-out limits for inactive users. The system warns users before their session expires and they may re-enter the system without losing content. 		        N/A. No time limits.  

A.3.2.3 Static Input Components:

If authoring tool user interface components accept input and move, then authors can pause the movement. (Level A)

 @Several
  • Adobe Flash (scrub-bar) (Yes)
 N/A.
All UI components are stationary.		 N/A.
All UI components are stationary.		 N/A.
All UI components are stationary.		   N/A.
All UI components are stationary.		         N/A.
All UI components are stationary.		  

A.3.2.4 Content Edits Saved (Extended):

The authoring tool can be set to automatically save web content edits made using the authoring tool. (Level AAA)

 @Several
  • @@Photoshop , Google Docs document editor, Dreamweaver?
 N/A.
Time session limits would be controlled by the higher level application.		 N/A.
Time session limits would be controlled by the higher level application.		 No.
No auto-save.		   ?         Yes  
Guideline A.3.3: (For the authoring tool user interface) Help authors avoid flashing that could cause seizures. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.3.3.1 Static View Option:

If the authoring tool contains editing-views that render visual time-based content, then those editing-views can be paused and can be set to not play automatically. (Level A)

 @At-least-one
  • AdobeFlash (Timeline only plays on user request) (Yes)
  • Premiere?,
  • IBM captioning tool
  • Amara
 N/A - does not play the video - just a placeholder. Animated gifs are an exception. No. Flash, video, etc. is not rendered, but animated gifs are. N/A (see TinyMCE) ? Yes ?          
Guideline A.3.4: (For the authoring tool user interface) Enhance navigation and editing via content structure. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.3.4.1 Navigate By Structure:

If editing-views expose the markup elements in the web content being edited, then the markup elements (e.g., source code, content renderings) are selectable and navigation mechanisms are provided to move the selection focus between elements. (Level AA)

 @Many
  • @@Amaya? (JS)
Yes
(using "Path" feature) 		Yes
(using "Path" feature) 		Yes
(TinyMCE)		 ? Yes
The “path” feature, in the advanced editing view, allows authors to select specific items in the content structure.		 ?   Yes ("Edit>Select Parent Tag", "Edit>Select Child")   N/A.
Markup is not exposed.		  

A.3.4.2 Navigate by Programmatic Relationships:

If editing-views allow editing of programmatic relationships within web content, then mechanisms are provided that support navigation between the related content. (Level AAA)

  • Note: Depending on the web content technology and the nature of the authoring tool, relationships may include, but are not limited to, element nesting, headings, labeling, programmatic definitions, and ID relationships.

@At-least-one

  • @@Eclipse IDE
 No No No ? ? ?          
Guideline A.3.5: (For the authoring tool user interface) Provide text search of the content. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.3.5.1 Text Search:

If the authoring tool provides an editing-view of text-based content, then the editing-view enables text search, such that all of the following are true: (Level AA)

  • (a) All Editable Text: Any text content that is editable by the editing-view is searchable (including alternative content); and
  • (b) Match: Matching results can be made visible to authors and given focus; and
  • (c) No Match: Authors are informed when no results are found; and
  • (d) Two-way: The search can be made forwards or backwards.

@Many

  • @@
 Yes
(via browser's search feature)		 Yes
(via browser's search feature)		 Yes
(TinyMCE via browser's search feature; own UI also includes search capability)		   Yes
(via browser's search feature)		 Yes   Yes   Yes  
Guideline A.3.6: (For the authoring tool user interface) Manage preference settings. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.3.6.1 Independence of Display:

If the authoring tool includes display settings for editing-views, then the authoring tool allows authors to adjust these settings without modifying the web content being edited. (Level A)

 @Many
  • @@XStandard2.1 GoogleDocs

Yes
(since browser display settings are used)

Yes
(since browser display settings are used) 		Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes
(via browser display settings)		 Yes
(since browser display settings are used) 		Yes   Yes      

A.3.6.2 Save Settings:

If the authoring tool includes display and/or control settings, then these settings can be saved between authoring sessions. (Level AA)

 

 @Many
  • @@XStandard2.1
N/A.
Only has "Fullscreen" option.		 N/A.
Only has "Maximise" and "Show Blocks" options.		 Yes
(e.g. which view of the TinyMCE editor to use - plain text vs HTML vs WYSIWYG)		   ? Yes   Yes   Yes  

A.3.6.3 Apply Platform Settings:

The authoring tool respects changes in platform display and control settings, unless authors select more specific display and control settings using the authoring tool. (Level AA)

 @At-least-one
  • @@Dreamweaver (for Mac)? Desire2Learn? SAKAI?
No No.
Does not respect default size, color		 No
(TinyMCE) - but rest of system responds to Browser set text size, font		   ? ?          

A.3.6.4 Multiple Sets:

If the authoring tool includes display and/or control settings, then the authoring tool provides the option of saving and reloading multiple configurations of settings. (Level AAA)

@Several

  • @@
 N/A.
Would be controlled by the higher level application.		 N/A.
Would be controlled by the higher level application.		 No   ? ?   Yes Yes    
Guideline A.3.7: (For the authoring tool user interface) Ensure that previews are at least as accessible as in-market user agents. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.3.7.1 Preview (Minimum):

If a preview is provided, then at least one of the following is true: (Level A)

  • (a) In-Market User Agent: The preview renders content using a user agent that is in-market; or
  • (b) UAAG (Level A): The preview conforms to the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 Level A [UAAG].
 @Many (by (a))
  • @@XStandard2.1 (by (a)) Amaya? (JS)
Yes (a) Yes (a) Yes (a) Yes (a) Yes (a) Yes (a)   Yes (a) Yes (a) Yes (a)  

A.3.7.2 Preview (Enhanced):

If a preview is provided, then authors can specify which user agent performs the preview. (Level AAA)

@Many

  • @@
 Yes
Uses same browser as in use.		 Yes
Uses same browser as in use.		 Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes Yes Yes Uses same browser as in use.   Yes Yes Yes  
PRINCIPLE A.4: Editing-views must be understandable Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline A.4.1: (For the authoring tool user interface) Help authors avoid and correct mistakes. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.4.1.1 Content Changes Reversible (Minimum):

All authoring actions are either reversible or the authoring tool requires author confirmation to proceed. (Level A)

 

 @Many
  • @@XStandard2.1
Yes Yes Yes
TinyMCE undo.		 Yes
(warns before deleting content)		 Yes
TinyMCE undo.		 Yes
CKedit undo		   Yes ("Edit>Undo")   Yes ("Edit>Undo")  

A.4.1.2 Settings Change Confirmation:

If the authoring tool provides mechanisms for changing authoring tool user interface settings, then those mechanisms can reverse the setting changes, or the authoring tool requires author confirmation to proceed. (Level A)

 @Many
  • @@XStandard2.1
N/A. Only has "Fullscreen" option. N/A. Only has "Maximise" and "Show Blocks" options. N/A. No permanent settings. ? N/A? N/A   Yes   Yes  

A.4.1.3 Content Changes Reversible (Enhanced):

Authors can sequentially reverse a series of reversible authoring actions. (Level AAA)

  • Note: It is acceptable to clear the authoring action history at the end of authoring sessions.

@Many

  • @@

 

 Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes
CKedit 		  Yes   Yes  
Guideline A.4.2: (For the authoring tool user interface) Document the user interface including all accessibility features. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

A.4.2.1 Describe Accessibility Features:

For each authoring tool feature that is used to meet Part A of ATAG 2.0, at least one of the following is true: (Level A)

  • (a) Described in the Documentation: Use of the feature is explained in the authoring tool's documentation; or
  • (b) Described in the Interface: Use of the feature is explained in the authoring tool user interface; or
  • (c) Platform Service: The feature is a service provided by an underlying platform; or
  • (d) Not Used by Authors: The feature is not used directly by authors (e.g., passing information to a platform accessibility service).
 @Many
Yes
(as pop-ups)		 Yes.
(Ref)		 Yes   Yes Yes   Yes   Yes  

A.4.2.2 Document All Features:

For each authoring tool feature, at least one of the following is true: (Level AA)

  • (a) Described in the Documentation: Use of the feature is explained in the authoring tool's documentation; or
  • (b) Described in the Interface: Use of the feature is explained in the authoring tool user interface; or
  • (c) Platform Service: The feature is a service provided by an underlying platform; or
  • (d) Not Used by Authors: The feature is not used directly by authors (e.g., passing information to a platform accessibility service).
 @Many
  • @@
 Yes
(but only as pop-ups - b)		 Yes. (Ref) Yes   No ?   Yes   Yes  
PART B: Support the production of accessible content Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
PRINCIPLE B.1: Fully automatic processes must produce accessible content Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline B.1.1: Ensure automatically specified content is accessible. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.1.1.1 Content Auto-Generation After Authoring Sessions (WCAG):

If the authoring tool provides the functionality for automatically generating web content after the end of an authoring session, authors can specify that the content be accessible web content (WCAG). (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

  • Note: This success criterion applies only to automatic processes specified by the authoring tool developer. It does not apply when author actions prevent generation of accessible web content (WCAG).
 Level A:@At-least-one:
  • @@ATutorLCMS?
N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 Yes (developer created templates display content listings) N/A N/A          
Level AA:@At-least-one:
  • @@ATutorLCMS?
N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 Yes (developer created templates display content listings) N/A N/A          
Level AAA:@At-least-one:
  • @@ATutorLCMS?
N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 N/A.
Does not auto-generate content after seesions.		 Yes (developer created templates display content listings) N/A N/A          

B.1.1.2 Content Auto-Generation During Authoring Sessions (WCAG):

If the authoring tool provides the functionality for automatically generating web content during an authoring session, then at least one of the following is true: (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)
  • (a) Accessible: The content is accessible web content (WCAG) without author input; or
  • (b) Prompting: During the automatic generation process, authors are prompted for any required accessibility information (WCAG); or
  • (c) Automatic Checking: After the automatic generation process, accessibility checking is automatically performed; or
  • (d) Checking Suggested: After the automatic generation process, the authoring tool prompts authors to perform accessibility checking.
  • Note 1: Automatic generation includes automatically selecting templates for authors.
  • Note 2: This success criterion applies only to automatic processes specified by the authoring tool developer. It does not apply when author actions prevent generation of accessible web content (WCAG).
 Level A:@At-least-one:
  • @@ATutorLCMS? Dreamweaver8?
 Yes No.
Issues: Form elements lack labels; 		Yes Yes (developer created templates display content listings) Yes
With the exception of equation editor.		 Yes
In Drupal Core, aim is for all to be AA.		          
Level AA:@At-least-one:
  • @@ATutorLCMS? Dreamweaver8?
 Yes No.
Issues: Form elements lack labels; 		Yes Yes (developer created templates display content listings) ? Yes
In Drupal Core, aim is for all to be AA.		          

Level AAA:@At-least-one

  • @@

 

 Yes No.
Issues: Form elements lack labels; 		Yes Yes ? ?          
Guideline B.1.2: Ensure accessibility information is preserved. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.1.2.1 Restructuring and Recoding Transformations (WCAG):

If the authoring tool provides restructuring transformations or re-coding transformations, and if equivalent mechanisms exist in the web content technology of the output, then at least one of the following is true: (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

  • (a) Preserve: Accessibility information (WCAG) is preserved in the output; or
  • (b) Warning: Authors have the default option to be warned that accessibility information (WCAG) may be lost (e.g., when saving a vector graphic into a raster image format); or
  • (c) Automatic Checking: After the transformation, accessibility checking is automatically performed; or
  • (d) Checking Suggested: After the transformation, the authoring tool prompts authors to perform accessibility checking.
  • Note 1: For text alternatives for non-text content, see Success Criterion B.1.2.4.
  • Note 2: This success criteria only applies when the output technology is "included" for conformance.

Level A:@Several

  • @@examples needed - Jan (in general), Greg (New dreamweaver html5 extension, Adobe Encore?)@@video converters?
 Yes Yes Yes
(no export and there are some automatic code repair during paste from browser)		   ? "HTML Purifier"?          
Level AA:@Several
  • @@
 Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		   ? ?          
Level AAA:@Several
  • @@
 Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		   ? ?          

B.1.2.2 Copy-Paste Inside Authoring Tool (WCAG):

If the authoring tool supports copy and paste of structured content, then any accessibility information (WCAG) in the copied content is preserved when the authoring tool is both the source and destination of the copy-paste. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

@At-least-one

  • @@
 Yes   Yes   Yes ?          

@At-least-one

  • @@
 Yes   Yes   Yes ?          

@At-least-one

  • @@
 Yes   Yes   Yes ?          

B.1.2.3 Optimizations Preserve Accessibility:

If the authoring tool provides optimizing web content transformations, then any accessibility information (WCAG) in the input is preserved in the output. (Level A).

@At-least-one

  • @@Acrobat? Youtube?
 @@@Cleanup messy code? N/A Yes   N/A Yes?   Yes.
"Apply Source Formatting".		      

B.1.2.4 Text Alternatives for Non-Text Content are Preserved:

If the authoring tool provides web content transformations that preserve non-text content in the output, then any text alternatives for that non-text content are also preserved, if equivalent mechanisms exist in the web content technology of the output. (Level A).

  • Note: This success criteria only applies when the output technology is "included" for conformance.
 @Several
  • @@Acrobat (when exporting PDF from MS Word format) Final Cut Pro preserving captions?
N/A Yes Yes (transform-ations from IEEE LOM to SCORM package etc.)   Yes ?          
PRINCIPLE B.2: Authors must be supported in producing accessible content Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline B.2.1: Ensure accessible content production is possible. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.2.1.1 Accessible Content Possible (WCAG):

If the authoring tool places restrictions on the web content that authors can specify, then those restrictions do not prevent WCAG 2.0 success criteria from being met. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

 Level A:@Many
  • @@XStandard2.1
Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes Yes Yes   Yes      
Level AA:@Many
  • @@XStandard2.1
Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes Yes Yes   Yes      
Level AAA:@Many
  • @@XStandard2.1
Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes Yes Yes   Yes      
Guideline B.2.2: Guide authors to produce accessible content. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.2.2.1 Accessible Option Prominence (WCAG):

If authors are provided with a choice of authoring actions for achieving the same authoring outcome (e.g., styling text), then options that will result in accessible web content (WCAG) are at least as prominent as options that will not. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

 Level A:@At-least-one
  • @@Dreamweaver?
   Yes.
Header options are at least as prominent as styling options.		 N/A Yes Yes ?   Yes      

Level AA:@None-confirmed

  • @@Opencaps? TinyMCE?
     N/A   Yes ?          
Level AAA:@None-confirmed
  • @@
   . N/A   Yes ?          

B.2.2.2 Setting Accessibility Properties (WCAG):

If the authoring tool provides mechanisms to set web content properties (e.g., attribute values), then mechanisms are also provided to set web content properties related to accessibility information (WCAG). (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

 Level A:@At-least-one
  • @@Dreamweaver?
 Yes Yes.
E.g. alt text in Image properties, Caption and Summary in Table Properties		 Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes
(example)		 Yes Yes Yes
(example)		        
Level AA:@None-confirmed
  • @@
 Yes . Yes
(TinyMCE)		   Yes Yes          

Level AAA:@None-confirmed

  • @@
 Yes   Yes
(TinyMCE)		   Yes Yes          
Guideline B.2.3: Assist authors with managing alternative content for non-text content. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.2.3.1 Alternative Content is Editable (WCAG):

If the authoring tool provides functionality for adding non-text content, then authors are able to modify programmatically associated text alternatives for non-text content. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

 Level A:@Many
  • XStandard2.1 (Yes)
 Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes Yes Yes   Yes   Yes  
Level AA:@Many
  • XStandard2.1 (Yes)
 Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes Yes Yes   Yes   Yes  
Level AAA:@Many
  • XStandard2.1 (Yes)
 Yes Yes Yes
(TinyMCE)		 Yes Yes Yes   Yes   Yes  

B.2.3.2 Repair of Text Alternatives During Authoring Sessions:

If the authoring tool attempts to automatically or semi-automatically repair text alternatives for non-text content ("repair strings") during an authoring session, then the following are both true: (Level A)

  • (a) No Generic or Irrelevant Strings: Generic strings (e.g. "image") and irrelevant strings (e.g., the file name, file format) are not offered as repair strings; and
  • (b) Author Control: Authors have the opportunity to accept, modify, or reject the repair strings prior to insertion in the content.
 @None-confirmed
  • @@A-Prompt 1.0
 No. "Alternate Text" is the default. N/A
Does not make suggestions. Even when images are uploaded to the server for storage.		 No
(TinyMCE)		   N/A N/A          

B.2.3.3 Repair of Text Alternatives After Authoring Sessions:

If the authoring tool attempts to automatically repair text alternatives for non-text content after an authoring session has ended, then the following are both true. (Level A)

  • (a) No Generic or Irrelevant Strings: Generic strings (e.g. "image") and irrelevant strings (e.g., the file name, file format) are not offered as repair strings; and
  • (b) Author Control: In the subsequent authoring session (if any), auto-generated text alternatives are indicated and authors have the opportunity to accept, modify, or reject the text alternatives..

@None-confirmed

  • Jeanne: HTML5 flag?
 N/A N/A N/A   N/A N/A          

B.2.3.4 Save for Reuse:

 

If the authoring tool provides the functionality for adding non-text content,

when authors enter programmatically associated text alternatives for non-text content, then both of the following are true: (Level AAA)
  • (a) Save and Suggest: The text alternatives are automatically saved and suggested by the authoring tool, if the same non-text content is reused; and
  • (b) Edit Option: The author has the option to edit or delete the saved text alternatives.
 @At-least-one
  • @@A-Prompt 1.0 (Old)
 No No No Yes.
For image alt in the media library. Figure		 N/A ? Yes.
For alt. Figure		        
Guideline B.2.4: Assist authors with accessible templates. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.2.4.1 Accessible Template Options (WCAG):

If the authoring tool provides templates, then there are accessible template (WCAG) options for a range of template uses. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

Level A:@Several

  • @@Wordpress, Drupal,
N/A @@@ Both templates have issues. N/A Yes Yes Yes
In Drupal Core, aim is for all to be AA.		   Yes      
Level AA:@None-confirmed
N/A   N/A   Yes Yes
In Drupal Core, aim is for all to be AA.		          
Level AAA:@None-confirmed
  • @@
 N/A   N/A   No ?          

B.2.4.2 Identify Template Accessibility (Minimum):

If the authoring tool includes a template selection mechanism and provides any non-accessible template (WCAG) options, then the templates are provided such that the template selection mechanism can display distinctions between the accessible and non-accessible options. (Level AA)

  • Note: The distinction can involve providing information for the accessible templates, the non-accessible templates or both.
 @None-confirmed
  • @@
 N/A   N/A   N/A ?          

B.2.4.3 Author-Created Templates:

If the authoring tool includes a template selection mechanism and allows authors to create new non-accessible templates (WCAG), then authors can enable the template selection mechanism to display distinctions between accessible and non-accessible templates that they create. (Level AA)

  • Note: The distinction can involve providing information for the accessible templates (WCAG), the non-accessible templates or both.
 @None-confirmed
  • @@
 N/A N/A N/A   No ?          

B.2.4.4 Identify Template Accessibility (Enhanced):

If the authoring tool provides any non-accessible templates (WCAG) options and does not include a template selection mechanism, then the non-accessible templates include accessibility warnings within the templates. (Level AAA)

 @None-confirmed
  • @@A-Content (Div. Directorate)? Dreamweaver templates may list some accessible status info? Scholar's portal?
 N/A   N/A   No N/A          
Guideline B.2.5: Assist authors with accessible pre-authored content. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.2.5.1 Pre-Authored Content Selection Mechanism:

If authors are provided with a selection mechanism for pre-authored content other than templates (e.g., clip art gallery, widget repository, design themes), then both of the following are true: (Level AA)

  • (a) Indicate: The selection mechanism indicates the accessibility status of the pre-authored content (if known); and
  • (b) Prominence: Any accessible (WCAG) options are at least as prominent as other pre-authored content options.

@At-least-one

  • @@
 N/A   N/A Yes No Yes
In Drupal Core, aim is for all to be AA.		          

B.2.5.2 Pre-Authored Content Accessibility Status:

If the authoring tool provides a repository of pre-authored content, then each of the content objects has a recorded accessibility status. (Level AAA)

 @None-confirmed
  • A-Content (Div. Directorate)?
  • Dreamweaver templates may list some accessible status info?
  • Scholar's portal?
 N/A No N/A   No ?          
PRINCIPLE B.3: Authors must be supported in improving the accessibility of existing content Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline B.3.1: Assist authors in checking for accessibility problems. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.3.1.1 Checking Assistance (WCAG):

If the authoring tool provides authors with the ability to add or modify web content in such a way that a WCAG 2.0 success criterion can be violated, then accessibility checking for that success criterion is provided (e.g., an HTML authoring tool that inserts images should check for alternative text; a video authoring tool with the ability to edit text tracks should check for captions). (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

  • Note: Automated and semi-automated checking is possible (and encouraged) for many types of web content accessibility problems (WCAG). However, manual checking is the minimum requirement to meet this success criterion. In manual checking, the authoring tool provides authors with instructions for detecting problems, which authors must carry out by themselves. For more information on checking, see Implementing ATAG 2.0 - Appendix B: Levels of Checking Automation.
 Level A:@Several
  • WebAIM WAVE (Yes)
  • Acrobat Accessibility Checker (Yes)
 Yes
Via button launching AChecker.		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   No Maybe (non-core)
Quail API (based on http://quailjs.org/)
   No.
No longer part of CS6.		   Yes  
Level AA:@Several
  • WebAIM WAVE (Yes)
 Yes
Via button launching AChecker.		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   No Maybe (non-core)
Quail API (based on http://quailjs.org/)		   No      
Level AAA:@At-least-one
  • WebAIM WAVE?
  • Deque?
  • HiSoftware?
  • CommonLook?
Yes
Via button launching AChecker.		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   No ?   No      

B.3.1.2 Help Authors Decide:

If the authoring tool provides checks that require authors to decide whether a potential web content accessibility problem (WCAG) is correctly identified (i.e., manual checking and semi-automated checking), then instructions are provided from the check that describe how to decide. (Level A)

 

 @Several
  • WebAIM WAVE (Yes)
  • Acrobat Accessibility Checker (Yes)
 Yes
Via button launching AChecker.		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   N/A Yes
Quail API		   No   Yes  

B.3.1.3 Help Authors Locate:

If the authoring tool provides checks that require authors to decide whether a potential web content accessibility problem (WCAG) is correctly identified (i.e., manual checking and semi-automated checking), then the relevant content is identified to the authors. (Level A)

  • Note: Depending on the nature of the editing-view and the scope of the potential web content accessibility problem (WCAG), identification might involve highlighting elements or renderings of elements, displaying line numbers, or providing instructions.
 @Several
  • WebAIM WAVE (Yes)
  • Acrobat Accessibility Checker (Yes)
 Yes
Via button launching AChecker.		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   N/A Yes
Quail API		   No   Yes  

B.3.1.4 Status Report:

If the authoring tool provides checks, then authors can receive an accessibility status report based on the results of the accessibility checks. (Level AA)

  • Note: The format of the accessibility status report is not specified and they might include a listing of problems detected or a WCAG 2.0 conformance level, etc..
 @Several
  • WebAIM WAVE (Yes)
  • Acrobat Accessibility Checker (Yes)
 Yes
Via button launching AChecker.		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   N/A ?   No   Yes  

B.3.1.5 Programmatic Association of Results:

If the authoring tool provides checks, then the authoring tool can programmatically associate accessibility checking results with the web content that was checked. (Level AA)

 @At-least-one
  • @@EARL producing checkers?
 Yes
AChecker can export results.		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   N/A ?   No   No  
Guideline B.3.2: Assist authors in repairing accessibility problems. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.3.2.1 Repair Assistance (WCAG):

If checking (see Success Criterion B.3.1.1) can detect that a WCAG 2.0 success criterion is not met, then repair suggestion(s) are provided: (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

  • Note: Automated and semi-automated repair is possible (and encouraged) for many types of web content accessibility problems (WCAG). However, manual repair is the minimum requirement to meet this success criterion. In manual repair, the authoring tool provides authors with instructions for repairing problems, which authors must carry out by themselves. For more information on repair, see Implementing ATAG 2.0 - Appendix C: Levels of Repair Automation.
 Level A:@Several
  • WebAIM WAVE (Manual repair instructions are provided) (Yes)
  • Acrobat Accessibility Checker (Yes)
 Yes
(via button launching AChecker)		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin.		   N/A ?   No.
No longer part of CS6.		   Yes
(manual repair instructions with some pointing to semi-automated repair functionality)		  
Level AA:@Several
  • WebAIM WAVE (Yes)
 Yes
(via button launching AChecker)		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin		   N/A ?          
Level AAA:@At-least-one
  • WebAIM WAVE?
  • Deque?
  • HiSoftware?
  • CommonLook?
Yes
(via button launching AChecker)		 No Yes.
TinyMCE with Achecker plugin		   N/A ?          
PRINCIPLE B.4: Authoring tools must promote and integrate their accessibility features Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions
Guideline B.4.1: Ensure the availability of features that support the production of accessible content. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.4.1.1 Features Active by Default:

All accessible content support features are turned on by default. (Level A)

 

@Many

 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes   Yes   Yes
Checker is available by default (even if it isn't check-as-you-type).		  

B.4.1.2 Option to Reactivate Features:

If authors can turn off an accessible content support feature, then they can turn the feature back on. (Level A)

 @Many
  • SAKAI 3.0 HTML Authoring Component?
 Yes Yes Yes   N/A ?   Yes
(e.g., "Accessibility" preferences page) 		  Yes  

B.4.1.3 Feature Deactivation Warning:

If authors turn off an accessible content support feature, then the authoring tool informs them that this may increase the risk of content accessibility problems (WCAG). (Level AA)

 @None-confirmed
N/A
Can't be turned off.		 N/A
Can't be turned off.		 N/A
Can't be turned off.		   N/A ?          

B.4.1.4 Feature Prominence:

All accessible content support features are at least as prominent as features related to either invalid markup, syntax errors, spelling errors or grammar errors. (Level AA)

 @At-least-one
  • @@
 Yes N/A
No checker.		 Yes   Yes ?          
Guideline B.4.2: Ensure that documentation promotes the production of accessible content. Overall/ Other TinyMCE with Achecker Plugin CKEditor ATutor Defacto CMS D2L Drupal WordPress Adobe DW Adobe InDesign MS Word Lotus Connect-ions

B.4.2.1 Model Practice (WCAG):

A range of examples in the documentation (e.g., markup, screen shots of WYSIWYG editing-views) demonstrate accessible authoring practices (WCAG). (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)

Level A:@At-least-one

  • @@
 N/A
No included documentation.		   Yes Yes ? ?          
Level AA:@None-confirmed
  • Acrobat?
 N/A   Yes   ? ?          
Level AAA:@None-confirmed
  • OpenCaps?
 N/A   No   ? ?          

B.4.2.2 Feature Instructions:

Instructions for using any accessible content support features appear in the documentation. (Level A)

@Many

  • SAKAI 3.0 HTML Authoring Component?
 Yes Yes Yes   ? ?   Yes   Yes  

B.4.2.3 Tutorial:

The authoring tool provides a tutorial for an accessible authoring process that is specific to that authoring tool. (Level AAA)

@Several

 No No No   Yes
(example)		 Yes
(tools and best practices, theming guide)		   Yes
(example) 		  Yes "Video: Find and fix accessibility issues in Word 2010"  

B.4.2.4 Instruction Index:

The authoring tool documentation contains an index to the instructions for using any accessible content support features. (Level AAA)

@Several

 No No No   ? ?   Yes
(example)		   Yes. "Accessibility Features in Microsoft Office 2010"  

Applicability Notes:

These must always be considered.

For PART A: Make the authoring tool user interface accessible:

  1. Scope of "authoring tool user interface": The Part A success criteria apply to all aspects of the authoring tool user interface that are concerned with producing the "included" web content technologies. This includes views of the web content being edited and features that are independent of the content being edited (e.g., menus, button bars, status bars, user preferences, documentation).
  2. Reflected content accessibility problems: The authoring tool is responsible for ensuring that editing-views display the web content being edited in a way that is more accessible to authors with disabilities (e.g., ensuring that text alternatives in the content can be programmatically determined). However, where an authoring tool user interface accessibility problem is caused directly by the content being edited (e.g., if an image in the content lacks a text alternative), then this would not be considered a deficiency in the accessibility of the authoring tool user interface.
  3. Developer control: The Part A success criteria only apply to the authoring tool user interface as it is provided by the developer. They do not apply to any subsequent modifications by parties other than the authoring tool developer (e.g., user modifications of default settings, third-party plug-ins).
  4. User agent features: Web-based authoring tools may rely on user agent features (e.g., keyboard navigation, find functions, display preferences, undo features) to satisfy success criteria. Conformance claims are optional, but any claim that is made must record the user agent(s).
  5. Accessibility of features provided to meet Part A: The Part A success criteria apply to the entire authoring tool user interface, including any features added to meet the success criteria in Part A (e.g., documentation, search functions). The only exemption is for preview features, as long as they meet the relevant success criteria in Guideline A.3.7. Previews are treated differently than editing-views because all authors, including those with disabilities, benefit when preview features accurately reflect the functionality of user agents that are actually in use by end users.
  6. Unrecognizable content: When success criteria require authoring tools to treat web content according to semantic criteria, the success criteria do not apply when these semantics are missing (e.g., text that describes an image is only considered to be a text alternative when this role is encoded within markup).

For PART B: Support the production of accessible content:

  1. Author availability: Any Part B success criteria that refer to authors only apply during authoring sessions.
  2. Developer control: The Part B success criteria only apply to the authoring tool as it is provided by the developer. This does not include subsequent modifications by parties other than the authoring tool developer (e.g., third-party plug-ins, user-defined templates, user modifications of default settings).
  3. Applicability after the end of an authoring session: Authoring tools are responsible for the web content accessibility (WCAG) of web content that they automatically generate after the end of an author's authoring session (see Success Criterion B.1.1.1). For example, if the developer changes the site-wide templates of a content management system, these would be required to meet the accessibility requirements for automatically-generated content. Authoring tools are not responsible for changes to the accessibility of content that the author causes, whether it is author-generated or automatically-generated by another system that the author has specified (e.g., a third-party feed).
  4. Authoring systems: As per the ATAG 2.0 definition of authoring tool, several software tools (identified in any conformance claim) can be used in conjunction to meet the requirements of Part B (e.g., an authoring tool could make use of a third-party software accessibility checking tool).
  5. Accessibility of features provided to meet Part B: The Part A success criteria apply to the entire authoring tool user interface, including any features that must be present to meet the success criteria in Part B (e.g., checking tools, repair tools, tutorials, documentation).
  6. Multiple authoring roles: Some authoring tools include multiple author roles, each with different views and content editing permissions (e.g., a content management system may separate the roles of designers, content authors, and quality assurers). In these cases, the Part B success criteria apply to the authoring tool as a whole, not to the view provided to any particular authoring role. Accessible content support features should be made available to any authoring role where it would be useful.
  7. Unrecognizable content: When success criteria require authoring tools to treat web content according to semantic criteria, the success criteria do not apply when these semantics are missing (e.g., text that describes an image is only considered to be a text alternative when this role is encoded within markup).