This section describes the status of this document at the time of its
publication. Other documents may supersede this document. The latest status of
this document series is maintained at the W3C.
This document is an informative appendix to the working draft document Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines "Wombat" Working
Group Internal Draft, 23 May 2001.
This document is an attempt to reflect the consensus of the Authoring Tool
working group, but has not been endorsed by that group, the W3C or any of its
members. It is inappropriate to reference this document as other than
work-in-progress.
A list of current W3C Recommendations and other technical documents
including Working Drafts and Notes can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR.
Priority 1 checkpoints
- 1.1 Ensure that the author can
produce accessible
content in the markup
language(s) supported by the tool. [Priority 1]
- The minimum requirement is that the author can add or edit any
elements or element properties of the language that can enhance
accessibility. One common way to minimally satisfy this is by allowing
editing of document source (but see guideline 5). A more advanced tool
will provide an integrated interface to properties affecting
accessibility (see also checkpoint 7.2)
- Techniques
for checkpoint 1.1
- 1.2 Ensure that the tool
preserves all accessibility
information during authoring, transformations,
and conversions.
[Priority 1]
- At minimum, preserve all valid markup, regardless of whether or not
the tool is able to render it.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 1.2
- 2.2 Ensure that markup which the
tool automatically generates is valid for the language the tool is
generating. [Priority 1]
- This is necessary for user
agents to be able to render Web content in a manner
appropriate to a particular user's needs.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 2.2
- 3.3 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]
- The function of an object may be "known with
certainty" when the object is placed by the tool for a specific purpose
or the user has defined a purpose. For example, if a tool automatically
generates a navigation bar for all pages on a site, it is acceptable to
propagate the text
equivalent(s) for images that link to searching, the table of
contents, etc. When a new object is inserted and the function is
unknown, the tool should prompt
the author to enter an appropriate equivalent alternative without
providing a default entry, such as the file name. A default entry should
only be offered if it is human authored and has been previously
associated with the object by the author or within a pre-packaged
directory for the tool (ex. clip art gallery). Refer also to checkpoint 1.4 and checkpoint 3.5.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 3.3
- 6.1
Document all features that promote the production of accessible content.
[Priority 1]
- Techniques
for checkpoint 6.1
- 7.1 Ensure that the authoring
interface follows all operating environment conventions that benefit
accessibility. [Priority 1] for standards and conventions that are essential
to accessibility
- This checkpoint requires all aspects of the authoring interface to be
accessible to the author. This wide scope means that the checkpoint
applies to the implementation of all the other checkpoints in this
guidelines document. The techniques for this checkpoint include
references to checklists and guidelines for a number of platforms and to
general guidelines for accessible applications. In many cases
several sets of standards will be applicable.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.1
- 7.2 Ensure
that the authoring interface enables accessible editing of all element
and object properties.
[Priority 1]
- This checkpoint is a special case of checkpoint 7.1 that is especially
important to authoring tools. At minimum, the checkpoint requires at
least one accessible way to edit every element and object property
supported by the tool. More advanced implementations might ensure that
all of the ways in which the tool allows element and object properties
to be edited should be accessible.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.3
- 7.4 Allow the display preferences
of the authoring interface to be changed without
affecting the document markup. [Priority 1]
- This checkpoint applies primarily to WYSIWYG markup editing tools and
requires that the author be able to view the content, as it is being
authored, in a way that differs from the presumed default appearance of
the rendered content. At minimum there must be some mechanism for
changing the document display independently of the document markup.
There are a number of ways that this can be achieved, including
supporting operating environment display preferences and allowing the
author to specify an editing style sheet that is different from those
included with the end document. In addition, there must be some means by
which textual alternatives can be displayed to the author in place of
non-text elements.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.4
Relative Priority checkpoints
- 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]
- Any decisions made for the author by the tool should optimize the
accessibility of the content (as per WCAG). This applies to the choice
of markup type, file type, and markup practices. The author may be able
to override the choices proposed or made by the tool.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 1.3
- 1.4 Ensure that all
pre-authored content for the tool conforms to Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines 1.0 [WCAG10]. [Relative Priority]
- For example, templates must include accessible markup and content.
Images and multimedia libraries must include accessible alternatives,
such as alt text and long descriptions for images and captions, auditory
descriptions and collated text transcriptions for movies. Applets and
scripts must be accessible and include functional alternatives.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 1.4
- 3.1 Prompt the
author to provide equivalent
alternative information (e.g., captions,
auditory
descriptions, and collated
text transcripts for video). [Relative Priority]
- At times appropriate to the author-tool interaction, ask for (and
support the creation of) alternate text, captions, auditory
descriptions, collated text transcripts for video, etc.
Note: Some checkpoints in the Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines 1.0 [WCAG10] may not apply.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 3.1
- 3.2 Help the author create
structured content and separate information from its presentation. [Relative Priority]
- Note: Some checkpoints in Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 [WCAG10] may not apply.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 3.2
- 4.1
Check
for and inform the
author of accessibility
problems. [Relative Priority]
- At a minimum, prompt the author to manually check for specific
problems. Ideally, the checks should be automated to the greatest extent
possible..
- Techniques
for checkpoint 4.1
- 4.2 Assist authors in
correcting accessibility
problems. [Relative Priority]
- At a minimum, provide context-sensitive help with
the accessibility checking required by checkpoint 4.1.
Ideally, the author should be guided by examples, guidelines and
automated tools.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 4.2
Priority 2 checkpoints
- 1.5 Allow
the author to preserve markup not recognized by the tool. [Priority 2]
- Note: The author may have included
or imported markup that enhances accessibility but is not recognized by
the tool.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 1.5
- 2.1 Use the latest versions of W3C Recommendations when they
are available and appropriate for a task. [Priority 2]
- W3C specifications have undergone review specifically to ensure that
they do not compromise accessibility, and where possible, they enhance
it. If the markup does not conform to W3C Recommendations, inform the
author.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 2.1
- 5.1
Ensure that all functionality (prompts, checkers, information icons, etc.)
related to accessible
authoring practices is naturally integrated into the overall look and
feel of the tool. [Priority 2]
- Techniques
for checkpoint 5.1
- 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]
- Techniques
for checkpoint 5.2
- 6.2 Ensure that creating
accessible content is a naturally integrated part of the documentation,
including examples. [Priority 2]
- Techniques
for checkpoint 6.2
- 7.1 Ensure that the authoring
interface follows all operating environment conventions that benefit
accessibility. [Priority 2] for standards and conventions that are important
to accessibility
- This checkpoint requires all aspects of the authoring interface to be
accessible to the author. This wide scope means that the checkpoint
applies to the implementation of all the other checkpoints in this
guidelines document. The techniques for this checkpoint include
references to checklists and guidelines for a number of platforms and to
general guidelines for accessible applications. In many cases
several sets of standards will be applicable.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.1
- 7.3
Ensure that the authoring interface enables the author to edit the structure
of the document [Priority 2]
- This checkpoint is a special case of checkpoint 7.1 that is especially
important to authoring tools. At minimum, the checkpoint requires that
the author be able to copy, cut or paste an element and its content at
any level of the document tree hierarchy. More advanced implementations
might provide more powerful ways to edit elements or groups of elements
in the structure.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.3
- 7.5
Ensure that the authoring interface enables accessible navigation of editing
views via the document structure. [Priority 2 (was P1 in
ATAG10)]
- This checkpoint requires that tools make use of the structure of the
documents being edited, in order to simplify navigation for the author.
At minimum, the author should be able to move from element to element.
More advanced implementations might provide highly flexible mechanisms
that take advantage of the hierarchical nature of the document
tree.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.5
- 7.6 Ensure the authoring interface allows
the author to search within the editing
views. [Priority 2]
- This checkpoint requires that tools provide a search facility. While
this is a common feature in most text markup editing tools, it is less
common for other authoring tools (i.e. SVG and editors). At minimum, the
tool should allow basic text search. More advance implementations might
have more powerful mechanisms that, for example, might search on the
basis of structure or similarity.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.6
Priority 3 checkpoints
- 3.4
Provide functionality for managing, editing, and reusing alternative
equivalents for multimedia objects. [Priority 3]
- Note: These alternative equivalents may be packaged
with the tool, written by the author, retrieved from the Web, etc.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 3.5
- 4.4
Provide the author with a summary of the document's accessibility status.
[Priority 3]
- Techniques
for checkpoint 4.4
- 6.3 In a dedicated
section, document theprocess of producing accessible content. [Priority 3]
- At minimum, provide an overview of tags and attributes that are
required for or enhance accessibility. Ideally, the text should explain
which features help for which types of disability and tools; a general
overview of steps to produce accessible content would be helpful.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 6.3
- 7.1 Ensure that the authoring
interface follows all operating environment conventions that benefit
accessibility. [Priority 3] for standards and conventions that are
beneficial to accessibility
- This checkpoint requires all aspects of the authoring interface to be
accessible to the author. This wide scope means that the checkpoint
applies to the implementation of all the other checkpoints in this
guidelines document. The techniques for this checkpoint include
references to checklists and guidelines for a number of platforms and to
general guidelines for accessible applications. In many cases
several sets of standards will be applicable.
- Techniques
for checkpoint 7.1