15 June 2001
Authors: Graham Oliver, Charles McCathieNevile
This is a partial evaluation of Lotus Domino 5.02a and how it conforms to the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines. The evaluation was done against the document http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/WD-ATAG10-TECHS-20010319/ which includes the checkpoint text of The Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 Recommendation of 3 Feburary 2000 by Graham Oliver, with some additional work by Charles McCathieNevile. This work has not been endorsed by anyone but the two authors, who do not guarantee it is complete or correct (it may contain errors and is definitely not complete).
There are notes in here where the authors are not sure about how to interpret something. It is hoped that this will serve as useful input for the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines working group to modify the techniques document and clarify issues.
This document has been provided to Lotus Inc for their comments. Any comments received in future may be included by the authors in a future revision, along with further review results.
This document may be updated at any time, or obsoleted by a review of a more recent version of the software.
The authors apologise for the poor markup of this draft - it resuolted in using a variety of tools to edit content. It was felt that making the content available was more important than the formatting, although this document will be revised to provide consistent structure and formatting in line with accessibiltiy requirements.
Lotus Domino is assumed to fall into the following two categories :-
Markup Editing Tools:
Tools that assist authors to produce markup documents. These include text-based and WYSIWYG markup editors for HTML, XHTML, SMIL, etc. and word processors that save as markup formats.
and
Content Management Tools:
Tools that assist authors to create and organize specific types of Web content without the author having control over the markup or programming implementation. Good examples include courseware in which the author is prompted to enter various information which is then displayed in a format determined by the tool. Note: If the tool allows the author to control the markup that is actaully used to implement the higher-order content, then that functionality would be considered to be a Markup Editing Tool.Where the WCAG Guidelines are referenced only Priority 1 Guidelines are considered.
ATAG 1.1 Ensure that the author can produce
accessible content in themarkup language(s) supported by the tool. [Priority 1] (Checkpoint 1.1)Ensure that all structural features of the supported languages are available within the tool. [Required] @@
Answer
Yes, if you mean can you write any sort of markup that you want.
Allow the author to directly edit the source markup. (Suggested)
Answer
Partially
Example (Successful Editing of Source markup)
Basic WYSIWYG table
Creating a basic WYSIWYG table in Domino, results in the following HTML.
<HTML>
<!-- Lotus-Domino (Release 5.0.2a (Intl) - 23 November 1999 on Windows NT/Intel) -->
<HEAD>
</HEAD>
<BODY TEXT="000000" BGCOLOR="FFFFFF">
<FORM>
<TABLE BORDER=1>
<TR VALIGN=top><TD WIDTH="251"><B>Country</B></TD><TD WIDTH="251"><B>Capital</B></TD></TR>
<TR VALIGN=top><TD WIDTH="251">New Zealand</TD><TD WIDTH="251">Wellington</TD></TR>
<TR VALIGN=top><TD WIDTH="251">Australia</TD><TD WIDTH="251">Canberra</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</FORM>
</BODY>
</HTML>
Note the Domino renders all of its HTML in upper case, which is not be very XHTML friendly. However, as I am using the convention of adding all markup in lower case it allows the added markup to be spotted more easily.
Basic WYSIWYG table + Added Markup
Using the following dialog box, I am able to add table and cell tags
Which results in the following html
<HTML>
<!-- Lotus-Domino (Release 5.0.2a (Intl) - 23 November 1999 on Windows NT/Intel) -->
<HEAD>
</HEAD>
<BODY TEXT="000000" BGCOLOR="FFFFFF">
<FORM>
<TABLE ID="inserted_id" CLASS="inserted_class" STYLE="inserted_style" TITLE="inserted_title" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" BORDER=1>
<TR VALIGN=top><TD WIDTH="251"><B>Country</B></TD><TD WIDTH="251"><B>Capital</B></TD></TR>
<TR VALIGN=top><TD WIDTH="251">New Zealand</TD><TD ID="inserted_id_cell" CLASS="inserted_class_cell" STYLE="inserted_style_cell" TITLE="inserted_title_cell" align="right" WIDTH="251">Wellington</TD></TR>
<TR VALIGN=top><TD WIDTH="251">Australia</TD><TD WIDTH="251">Canberra</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</FORM>
</BODY>
</HTML>
Example (Unsuccessful Editing of Source markup)
Using the above example it is not possible (for example) to influence the rendering of the <TD> tag in the first row of the table. So they cannot be marked up as <TH> tags.
Conclusion
Domino could allow more editing of Source markup and in the case of <TH> tags makes the product arguably non-compliant with the section 508 requirement that 'Row and column headers shall be identified for data tables'.CMN: I wuld argue that it does fail the checkpoint, although it does meet the requirement for some cases.
When an extended (super-set) or simplified (sub-set) markup language is supported, ensure that the accessibility features in the base language are still available. (Suggested)
Answer
Don't understand this one CMN If the
language it uses is smaller or bigger than HTML, but is derived from it, make
sure that it supports all the accesssibliity features. For the HTML example,
that includes longdesc (don't know) and th
(which it
doesn't)
ATAG 1.2 Ensure that the tool preserves all
accessibility information during authoring,transformations, andconversions. [Priority 1] (Checkpoint 1.2)Ensure that the tool preserves all the elements that are defined in the relevant specification(s) even if it is unable to render them in a publishing view or preview mode.[Required] @@
Answer
With authoring nothing will be thrown away.
Domino also has an 'Import Service' (DIS) that allows html pages to be 'sucked into' Domino , see
http://www.notes.net/today.nsf/f01245ebfc115aaf8525661a006b86b9/dc30cd765ea86881852568f10060b96b?OpenDocument(Note that the latest version of this tool is 2.1)
No evaluation of this process has been carried out for its impact on the markup.
Allow the author to decide whether or not to preserve unrecognized markup (since it might be accessibility related). See ATAG 4.3. (Suggested)
Answer
I don't know how DIS will deal with unrecognised markup
When transforming a table to a list or list of lists, ensure that table headings are transformed into headings and that summary or caption information is retained as rendered content. [Required] @@
Answer
Not relevant as far as I am aware because I don't understand under what circumstances a table would be being transformed. CMN for example, if it gets a table with th elements, does it keep them? (authoring). I don't know if it allows you to do transforms from one type of thing (e.g. a list) to another (e.g a table) or not.
When converting documents, allow authors to edit conversion templates to specify the way presentation conventions should be converted into structural markup.(Suggested)
Answer
Don't believe DIS allows this.
When importing images with associated descriptions into a markup document, make the descriptions available through appropriate markup.
Answer
Would need to test this
Avoid transforming text into images. Use style sheets for presentation control, or an XML application such as Scalable Vector Graphics
[SVG] that keeps the text as text. If this is not possible, ensure that the text is available as equivalent text for the image. [Required] @@Answer
I believe that DIS would keep text as text.
When converting from a word-processor format to markup, ensure that headings and list items are transformed into appropriate structural markup (appropriate level of heading or type of list, etc.).
Answer
n/a CMN I thought that it could interpret RTF / Word. If it converts a Word Heading or list into an HTML one it does this - if it converts it to formatted text it doesn't.
Ensure that changes to a document's graphical layout do not reduce readability when rendered serially. Some desktop publishing software allow the author to view the linearized reading order. (Suggested)
Answer
I don't understand this one. CMN If moving text around (I guess in a template) means that it doesn't move around in the HTML source it generates then it fails. Publisher fails. I suspect Lotus doesn't.
When converting linked elements such as footnotes or endnotes, either provide them as inline content or maintain two-way linking. In HTML, this should be hypertext links rather than plain-text references. (Suggested)
Answer
Don't know what DIS does.
ATAG 1.3 Ensure that when the tool automatically generates markup it conforms to the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
[WCAG10] . [Relative Priority] (Checkpoint 1.3) CMN This only applies to markup the tool makes itself - for example you do some layout in genrating a template and it does it in some horrid way like Publisher does.
Ensure that any markup generated automatically by the tool conforms to the WCAG10 guidelines.
Answer
The author can add alt text using the following dialog box
Answer
As for images
Answer
Domino does not automatically generate image maps, it’s a manual coding exercise.
Answer
As for images
Answer
As for images (but note that the alt text appears to be marked as optional)
Recommendation
Remove the word 'Optional' from this dialog box
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
As for images
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
Can't be done 'naturally' using Domino, only methodology would end up with a process where equivalent text would be added as for images.
Answer
As for images
Answer
As for images
Answer
Domino doesn't provide the ability to provide text equivalents of any of the above (as far as I am aware).
Remark *
They seem like a separate category to me (certainly in Domino terms) and possibly in 'tool maturity terms'.
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
Not relevant (see Remark * above)
Answer
Not relevant (see Remark * above)
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
This has been dealt with above (see the 'Edit Source Markup' section)
Domino appears to be in breach of this guideline.
Answer
Similar to the above issue
Answer
Manual coding and testing exercise
Answer
This is pretty much covered under the WCAG 1.1 section above
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
This is not really Domino's job (I would say), it just picks up what has been produced by another tool.
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
Manual coding exercise
Answer
Covered above, you can do this with Domino
Answer
Manual exercise, but Domino has a spell checker built into the Designer.
ATAG 1.4 Ensure that templates provided by the tool conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
[WCAG10] . [Relative Priority] (Checkpoint 1.4)Terminology Clarification
Domino uses different terminology to a lot of other web development tools.
A 'Template' from a Domino perspective ('Domino Template') has no natural equivalent in the world of web development. It is in fact a database that acts as a repository for commonly used design elements.
A 'Template' ('Web Template') in the world of web development has its closest equivalent in a 'Domino Form'.
For tools that allow author's to create their own templates, advise the author that templates should be held to a high accessibility standard, since they will be repeatedly re-used. Help the author reach this goal by making an accessibility check mandatory before saving as a template. (Suggested)
Answer
Domino does allow authors to create their own templates (Domino Form). No accessibility check is done before saving.
Ensure that any
template provided by the tool conforms to the WCAG10 guidelines. Because this
ATAG checkpoint has a relative priority, it is the priority of the relevant
WCAG checkpoints that determines the level of conformance of the tool to the
ATAG checkpoint *Note on Equivalent Alternatives: The
equivalent alternatives themselves may not appear in the template unless the
function of the non-text element is known with certainty (see ATAG
3.4)):
Answer
Domino provides a large number of standard 'Domino Templates' which contain large numbers of 'Domino Forms' ('Web Templates').
None of them will have been created with accessibility in mind (I would imagine) and the process of going through them to identify where they produce inaccessible markup is a big one.
Could start with the most commonly used, mail and discussion?
ATAG 2.1 Use the latest versions of W3C Recommendations when they are available and appropriate for a task. [Priority 2] (
Checkpoint 2.1)Answer
Domino doesn't do this well.
There appears to be little regard for the W3C standards when Domino renders content to the web.
A Few Examples
When creating a 'Domino Page', Domino will add the <FORM> element for no apparent reason. This causes a failure under validation because the resulting page doesn't have an associated action (It doesn't need one!!!)
The <HEAD> element is allowed to be empty, no title is required.
It is relatively easy to create a duplicate 'attribute' such as
<BODY TEXT="000000" BGCOLOR="FFFFFF" TEXT="FFFFFF">
Answer
I don't really understand this one. CMN I suspect it doesn't apply - if Domino produces HTML then it is a question of whether it can generate longdesc, alt, etc. Depends on what it allows you to add somehow... (but it will fail checkpoints 5.1 and 5.2 I guess)
Answer
I don't really understand this one. CMN Hmm, maybe I don't either. Let's throw it to the group.
Answer
This is under the hood
Answer
Not done
Answer
I don't fully understand this one, because I don't know why I would publish a DTD on the web.
The use of DTD's is not usual in Domino, but can be done. CMN Presumably if you use a different DTD you don't generate it in Domino, so this would not apply.
Answer
If I understand this correctly, the namespaces and schemas are part of the DTD, so the same answer as above applies.
Answer
Not done
Answer
Not done
Answer
Not done
ATAG 3.1
Prompt the author to provideequivalent alternative information (e.g.,captions,auditory descriptions, andcollated text transcripts for video). [Relative Priority] (Checkpoint 3.1)
Answer
Not done
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Not done
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
Answer
ATAG 3.3 Ensure that prepackaged content conforms to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
[WCAG10] . [Relative Priority] (Checkpoint 3.3)
Note: Including pre-written descriptions for all multimedia files (e.g., clip-art) packaged with the tool will save authors time and effort, cause a significant number of professionally written descriptions to circulate on the Web, provide authors with convenient models to emulate when they write their own descriptions, and show authors the importance of description writing.
Refer also to checkpoint 3.5.
Use formats that allow for accessible annotation to be included in the files, such as SMIL, PNG, and SVG.[Required] @@
Answer
Provide long
descriptions, and associated text files with appropriate
Answer
Provide video description
files with prepackaged video.[Required] @@
Answer
Provide text caption
files for prepackaged audio, or video with auditory track(s).[Required]
@@
Answer
ATAG 3.4 Do not automatically generate
equivalent alternatives. Do not reuse previously authored alternatives without author confirmation, except when the function is known with certainty. [Priority 1] (Checkpoint 3.4)Answer
If the author has not specified alternative text for an
IMG
, or specified that none is required, default to having
no"alt"
attribute, so that an accessibility problem will be
noted.Refer also to checkpoint
4.1.[Required] @@
Answer
Default behaviour
Human-authored equivalent
alternatives may be available for an object (for example, through
Answer
Not available
Items used throughout a
Website, such as graphical navigation bars, should have standard alternative
information. However the author should be prompted to edit or approve this the
first time it is used in a site, and when the destination of the links is
changed by the author.(Suggested)
Answer
No prompts but Domino does allow resuse of things like graphical navigation bars.
Where an object has
already been used in a document, the tool should offer the alternative content
that was supplied for the first or most recent use as a
default.(Suggested)
Answer
The same as above
ATAG 3.5 Provide functionality for managing, editing, and reusing
alternative equivalents for multimedia objects. [Priority 3] (Checkpoint 3.5)
Note:
This checkpoint is priority 3, so it does not have a critical effect on an authoring tool's likelihood of producing accessible mark-up. However, implementing this checkpoint has the potential to simultaneously satisfy several higher priority checkpoints (ATAG 3.1, ATAG 3.2, and ATAG 3.4) and dramatically improve the usability of an authoring tool.
Maintain a database registry that associates object identity information with alternative information. Whenever an object is used and an equivalent alternative is collected (as per
checkpoint 3.1) add the object (or identifying information) and the alternative information to the database. In the case of atext equivalent, the alternate information may be stored in the document source. For more substantial information (such as video captions or audio descriptions), the information may be stored externally and linked from the document source. Allow different alternative information to be associated with a single object.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done.
Alternatives are added when the image is introduced into the design element ('Domino Form' or 'Domino Page'). However, given the current Domino architecture it may be possible to add 'Default Alternative Information' in the Image Resources area, this is (at least partly) what is asked for above
If such a database is
maintained, the pre-written descriptions can be presented to the author as
default text in the appropriate field, whenever one of the associated files is
inserted into the author's document. This satisfies ATAG 3.4 because the
equivalent alternatives are not automatically generated and they are only
reused with author confirmation.(Suggested)
Answer
See above.
If no previous
association is found, the field should be left empty (i.e., no purely
rule-generated alternative information should be used). Note:
The term "default" implies that the alternative information is offered for the
author's approval. The term does not imply that the default alternative
information is automatically placed without the author's approval. Such
automatic placement may only occur when in situations where the function of
the object is known with certainty, per
Answer
n/a
The pre-written
alternative information provided for all packaged multimedia files (per
Answer
Not done and I don't think is relevant.
ATAG 4.1
Check for andinform the author ofaccessibility problems. [Relative Priority] (Checkpoint 4.1)
Note:
Accessibility problems should be detected automatically where possible. Where this is not possible, the tool may need toprompt the author to make decisions or to manually check for certain types of problems. In the section below, the evaluation (ATAG 4.1) and repair (ATAG 4.2) techniques for each WCAG checkpoint have been grouped together.
See AERT document for evaluation and repair algorithms.(Suggested)
Highlight problems detected when documents
are opened, when an editing or insertion action is completed, or while an
author is editing. Using CSS classes to indicate accessibility problems will
enable the author to easily configure the presentation of
errors.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Alert authors to accessibility problems when
saving.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Accessibility problems can be highlighted
using strategies similar to spell checking within a word processor.
Accessibility alerts within the document can be linked to context sensitive
help.
Refer also to checkpoint 4.2.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Where the tools cannot test for
accessibility errors, provide the author with the necessary information,
wizards, etc. to check for themselves.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Include alerts for WCAG 1.0
Priority 1 checkpoints in the default configuration.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Provide an editing view that shows
equivalent alternatives in the main content view to make it clear that they
are necessary. This will make it obvious when they are
missing.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Allow authors to choose different alert
levels based on the priority of authoring accessibility
recommendations.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
If intrusive warnings are used, provide a
means for the author to quickly set the warning to non-obtrusive to avoid
frustration.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
ATAG 4.2 Assist authors in correcting accessibility problems. [Relative Priority] (Checkpoint 4.2)
At a minimum, provide context-sensitive help with the accessibility checking required by checkpoint 4.1.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Where there are site-wide errors, to make
correction more efficient, allow the author to make site-wide changes or
corrections. For example, this may be appropriate for a common error in
markup, but may not be appropriate in providing a text equivalent that is
appropriate for one use of an image but completely inappropriate for the other
uses of the image on the same site (or even the same page).(Suggested)
Answer
The nature of Domino, allows this to be done to a certain extent, using Domino Forms or SubForms and Image Resources.
Assist authors in ways that are consistent
with the look and feel of the authoring tool (See ATAG 5.1).(Suggested)
Answer
n/a as there is no assistance
Allow authors to control both the nature and
timing of the correction process.(Suggested)
Answer
As above
Provide a mechanism for authors to navigate
sequentially among uncorrected accessibility errors (See ATAG 7.4).(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
ATAG 4.3 Allow the author to preserve markup not recognized by the tool. [Priority 2] (Checkpoint 4.3)
Note:
The author may have included or imported markup that enhances accessibility but is not recognized by the tool.
If possible, preserve all unrecognized markup, since it might be related to accessibility (See ATAG 1.2).[Required] @@
Answer
OK
If changes to markup that is not recognized
by the tool are necessary for the tool to further process the document (for
example, a tool that requires valid markup when a document is opened), inform
the author.[Required] @@
Answer
Sorry Charles I can't get my head around this.
Provide options for the author to confirm or
override removal of markup on a change-by-change basis or as a batch
process.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Provide a summary of all automated
structural changes that may affect accessibility.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Do not change the DTD without notifying the
author.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done, there are no DTDs
ATAG 4.4 Provide the author with a summary of the document's accessibility status. [Priority 3] (Checkpoint 4.4) Provide a list of all accessibility errors found in a Web page.[Required] @@
Answer
Not done
Provide a summary of accessibility problems
remaining by type and/or by number.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
ATAG 4.5 Allow the author to transform presentation markup that is misused to convey structure into structural markup, and to transform presentation markup used for style into style sheets. [Priority 3] (Checkpoint 4.5)
Answer
Not done
Allow the author to define transformations for imported documents that have presentation, rather than structural, markup.[Required] @@
Answer
This may be part of DIS, not sure.
Remember that accessibility information,
including attributes or properties of the elements being transformed, must be
preserved - see checkpoint 1.2.[Required] @@
Answer
This may be part of DIS, not sure.
Some examples of transformations include
(Suggested):
BR
to the P
element.FONT
into heuristically or
author-determined structure.span
into ruby
.Implement XSLT [XSLT] together with a user-interface for expressing transformations (see ATAG 2.1).(Suggested)
Answer
Don't know, Lotus have done a lot of work integrating XML and XSLT into Domino but don't really know enough about the technology to assess this check.
Can you give me a clue?
Allow the author to create style rules based
on the formatting properties of an element, and then apply the rule to other
elements in the document, to assist conversion of documents to the use of
style sheets(Suggested)
Answer
Not Done
Include pre-written transformations to
rationalize multiple tables, and to transform (deprecated) presentation HTML
into style sheets.(Suggested)
Answer
Not Done
ATAG 5.1 Ensure that functionality related to
accessible authoring practices is naturally integrated into the overall look and feel of the tool. [Priority 2] (Checkpoint 5.1)
Answer
Well, there is some stuff related to accessible authoring practices and it is well integrated. There could be a lot more as this document makes clear!
The accessibility features should be designed as integral components of the authoring tool application, not plug-ins or other peripheral components that need to be separately obtained, installed, configured or executed.[Required] @@
Answer
As above
Ensure that author can utilize the tool's
accessible authoring features by the same interaction styles used for other
features in the program. For example, if the tool makes use of onscreen
symbols such as underlines or coloration change rather than dialogs for
conveying information, then the same interface techniques should be used to
convey accessibility information.[Required] @@
Answer
As above
The same fonts, text sizes, colors, symbols, etc. that characterize other program features should also characterize those dealing with accessibility.[Required] @@
Answer
As above
Include considerations for accessibility -
such as the
"alt"
and"longdesc"
attributes of the
HTMLIMG
element - right below the"src"
attribute in
a dialogue box, not buried behind an "Advanced..." button.[Required] @@
Answer
Not Done
The default installation of the authoring
tool should include all accessibility features enabled. The author may have
the option to disable these features later on.[Required] @@
Answer
Not Done
Allow efficient and fast access to
accessibility-related settings with as few steps as possible needed to make
any changes that will generate accessible content.(Suggested)
Answer
Not Done
ATAG 5.2 Ensure that
accessible authoring practices supporting Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0[WCAG10]
Priority 1 checkpoints are among the most obvious and easily initiated by the author. [Priority 2] (Checkpoint 5.2)
If there is more than one option for the author, and one option is more accessible than another, place the more accessible option first and make it the default. For example, when the author has selected text to format, the use of CSS should be emphasized rather than deprecated
FONT
element.[Required] @@
Answer
Not Done, quite the reverse really
Highlight the most accessible solutions when
presenting choices for the author.(Suggested)
Answer
Domino doesn't really present choices to the author
Provide an editing view that shows
equivalent alternatives in the main content view to make it clear that they
are necessary, and will make it obvious when they are missing.(Suggested)
Answer
Not Done
ATAG 6.1 Document all features that promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 1] (
Answer
This page is it
There is some additional material on
and at the IBM accessibility centre at www-3.ibm.com/able
Ensure that the help system of the tool can answer the questions: "What features does this tool have to encourage the production of accessible content?" and "How are these used?".[Required] @@
Answer
See above
Link from help text to any automated
correction utilities.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
Link those mechanisms to identify
accessibility problems (i.e., icons, outlining or other emphasis within the
user interface) to help files.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
ATAG 6.2 Ensure that creating accessible content is a naturally integrated part of the documentation, including examples. [Priority 2] (
Answer
Not done
Always include accessibility-related practices in every example for which one would be required, regardless of whether the example is meant to emphasize this or not (e.g., HTML
IMG
elements should appear with analt
attribute
and alongdesc
attribute wherever appropriate).[Required] @@
Answer
Not done
Provide examples of all accessibility
solutions in help text, including those of lower priority in WCAG 1.0
.[Required] @@
Answer
Not done
Writing Accessibility Rationale
(Suggested):
, at least to the level that the tool conforms to ATAG 1.0[ATAG10]
text equivalents as being "for blind authors", but rather as "for authors who are not viewing images".
Explaining Accessibility (Suggested):
Context Sensitive Help (Suggested):
Outside Reference (Suggested):
Tutorials (Suggested):
Answer
Not done
ATAG 6.3 In a dedicated section, document all features of the tool that promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 3] (Checkpoint 6.3)
Answer
Not done
Ensure that the help system of the tool includes the documentation required by ATAG 6.1 in a dedicated section.[Required] @@
Answer
Not done
The dedicated section could be prefaced by
an introduction that explains the importance of accessibility for a wide range
of users, from those with disabilities to those with alternative
viewers.(Suggested)
Answer
Not done
General
All of the author's responses below are given under the caveat, that no testing has been done with accessible technology or by people with disabilities, both of which are fundamental to determining accessibility.
This document http://doc.notes.net/domino_notes/5.0.3/help5_client.nsf/0/03aacc49a076a8208525687e00740e40
sets out how IBM has made the Notes Client accessible.
As far as I am aware all of the accessibility enhancements that were made to the Notes Client also work in the Domino Designer as they appear to spring from the same basic design.
I would like to take this opportunity to acklnowledge the work that IBM has done in this area.
ATAG 7.1 Use all applicable operating system and accessibility standards and conventions (Priority 1 for standards and conventions that are essential to accessibility; Priority 2 for those that are important to accessibility; Priority 3 for those that are beneficial to accessibility). (
Answer
See above referenced document.
ATAG 7.2 Allow the author to change the presentation within
editing views without affecting the document markup. [Priority 1] (Checkpoint 7.2)
Answer
OK
Answer
OK
Answer
n/a
Answer
Not Done
Answer
n/a
Answer
Not Done
Answer
Not Done
Answer
Answer
Not Done, arguably n/a
Answer
Not Done, arguably n/a
Answer
Not Done, arguably n/a
Answer
n/a
Answer
n/a
"accesskey"
attribute, and activate it in
editing views.(Suggested)Answer
Not Done
Answer
Not Done, arguably n/a
Answer
OK
BR
to P
switch
, excl
, and
par
FONT
(deprecated) into heuristically determined structure
g
to symbol
g
or an HTML p
elementAnswer
Not Done
Allow the user to search for a sequence of characters as a minimal measure for meeting this checkpoint.[Required] @@
Answer
OK
More powerful searches can include the
ability to perform searches that are case sensitive or case-insensitive, the
ability to replace a search string, the ability to repeat a previous search
to find the next or previous occurrence, or to select multiple occurrences
with a single search.(Suggested)
Answer
OK
The ability to search for a particular
type of structure is useful in a structured document, structured image such
as a complex SVG image, etc.(Suggested)
Answer
n/a
In an image editor, the ability to select
an area by properties (such as color, or closeness of color) is useful and
common in middle range and high end image processing
software.(Suggested)
Answer
n/a
The ability to search a database for
particular content, or to search a collection of files at once (a simple
implementation of the latter is the Unix function "grep") is an important
tool in managing large collections, especially those that are dynamically
converted into Web content.(Suggested)
Answer
OK
The use of metadata (per WCAG 1.0
) can allow for very complex searching of large collections, or of timed presentations. Refer also to the paper "A Comparison of Schemas for Dublin Core-based Video Metadata Representation"[SEARCHABLE]
for discussion specifically addressing timed multimedia presentations.(Suggested)
Answer
Not Done