W3C WBS Home

Results of Questionnaire AUWG Survey for 7 January 2013 - part 2 (A.3)

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.

This questionnaire was open from 2012-12-28 to 2013-03-29.

8 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. A.3.1.1 tests
  2. A.3.1.2 tests
  3. A.3.1.3 tests
  4. A.3.1.4 tests
  5. A.3.1.5 test(s)
  6. A.3.1.6 tests
  7. A.3.2.1 tests
  8. A.3.2.2 tests
  9. A.3.2.3 tests
  10. A.3.2.4 tests
  11. A.3.3.1 tests
  12. A.3.4.1 tests
  13. A.3.4.2 tests
  14. A.3.5.1 tests
  15. A.3.6.1 tests
  16. A.3.6.2 tests
  17. A.3.6.3 tests
  18. A.3.6.4 tests
  19. A.3.7.1 tests
  20. A.3.7.2 tests

1. A.3.1.1 tests

Success Criteria

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.

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: 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.

Test 0001 Author: Tim Boland

  1. If the platform on which the authoring tool is installed cannot be used with a keyboard (i.e. a mobile device that lacks a built in keyboard and cannot be connected via USB, Bluetooth, etc. to any form of external keyboard), then select FAIL. (Note: If this is due to limitations of the platform, "Partial Conformance due to Platform Limitation" is still possible.)
  2. If an external keyboard is required, attach one.
  3. Open authoring tool on the selected platform and document (list) all functions of authoring tool (this could be from authoring tool documentation or author experience with the tool). Do not include any functions where path-dependent input is required. The path exception includes the any data continuously collected from pointing devices, including pressure, speed, and angle (e.g. a paintbrush tool in a graphics editor).
  4. For each function in the list:
    1. Check that the function works correctly with the keyboard. If it does not, then select FAIL.
    2. If the function must be accessed by traversing keyboard focus through the authoring tool user interface, check whether a visible focus indicator is provided for the function's user interface controls. If there is not, then select FAIL.
    3. Check that the system never requires the user to press a key within a time period of less than 20 seconds. If this is ever the case, then select FAIL.
    4. Go to the next function in the list (if any).
  5. Select PASS (all functions must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.1.1 testsComments on A.3.1.1
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Add this to end of step 1. "(Note: If this is due to limitations of the platform, "Partial Conformance due to Platform Limitation" is still possible.)"

Shouldn't there be a step here for web-based content where it already passes 2.1.1 to avoid duplicative test?

This SC is not about visible focus, why is 4.2 there?

Language in 4.3 can be improved. The never and ever conditions are not as clear as it can be.

2. A.3.1.2 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test 0001 Assertion: 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.

Test 0001 Author: Tim Boland, Jan

  1. If the platform on which the authoring tool is installed cannot be used with a keyboard (i.e. a mobile device that lacks a built in keyboard and cannot be connected via USB, Bluetooth, etc. to any form of external keyboard), then select SKIP.
  2. Determine whether there is a mechanism for traversing a visible keyboard focus through the user interface. If not, then select SKIP.
  3. For each screen of the user interface:
    1. Note the control on which the focus begins when the screen is opened..
    2. Use the mechanism to traverse the user interface controls.
    3. If it is possible to have the keyboard focus traverse to all controls and then return to the first control either by "looping" forward or traversing the controls in a backwards order, then go to the next screen.
    4. If keyboard focus cannot be returned to the first control because once it remains "stuck" one control or on a sub-set of controls (which do not include the first control), the select FAIL.
    5. Go to the next screen (if any).
  4. Select PASS (all of the screens must not include any keyboard traps)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.1.2 testsComments on A.3.1.2
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal TYPO: because once it remains "stuck" one control or on a sub-set of controls --> because it remains "stuck" on one control or on a sub-set of controls
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Add this to end of step 1. "(Note: If this is due to limitations of the platform, "Partial Conformance due to Platform Limitation" is still possible.)"

Shouldn't there be a step here for web-based content where it already passes 2.1.2 to avoid duplicative test?

On 3.4, what if the keyboard focus cannot be returned to the first control for an unlisted reason.

The test does not involve collecting data on standard exit methods (Esc, F6, etc.) nor does it involve determining whether authors are advised of the method for moving focus away, probably via documentation.

Lastly, the test is really about looping or linearization of focus order. The SC is about whether you can move the focus away from a given component. There is a difference.

3. A.3.1.3 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: The authoring tool user interface includes mechanisms to make keyboard access more efficient than sequential keyboard access.

Test 0001 Author: Tim Boland, Jan

  1. If the platform on which the authoring tool is installed cannot be used with a keyboard (i.e. a mobile device that lacks a built in keyboard and cannot be connected via USB, Bluetooth, etc. to any form of external keyboard), then select SKIP.
  2. If the authoring tool supports at least two direct keyboard commands (e.g. a special key such as command, control, alt, shift, etc. plus another key), then select select PASS.
  3. Determine whether there is a mechanism for traversing a visible keyboard focus through the user interface. If not, then select SKIP.
  4. Determine whether there is a mechanism for traversing a visible keyboard focus through all of the user interface components in a sequential fashion. If not, then select SKIP.
  5. Determine if there is any method of moving the focus more directly to interface components that occur later in the sequential order than simply traversing all of the intervening controls (e.g., page up, page down, home, end, skip to links, etc.). If at least two exist, then select select PASS. Otherwise, select FAIL.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field) 1
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.1.3 testsComments on A.3.1.3
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal TYPO: "select select"
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal Just at the end of points 2 and 5 the word "select" is repeated twice: "select select PASS"
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Recommend changes (see comments field) Add this to end of step 1. "(Note: If this is due to limitations of the platform, "Partial Conformance due to Platform Limitation" is still possible.) "

4. A.3.1.4 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: All functionality of the authoring tool is operable through a keyboard interface without requiring specific timings for individual keystrokes.

Test 0001 Author: Tim Boland, Jan

  1. If the platform on which the authoring tool is installed cannot be used with a keyboard (i.e. a mobile device that lacks a built in keyboard and cannot be connected via USB, Bluetooth, etc. to any form of external keyboard), then select FAIL. (Note: If this is due to limitations of the platform, "Partial Conformance due to Platform Limitation" is still possible.)
  2. If an external keyboard is required, attach one.
  3. Open authoring tool on the selected platform and document (list) all functions of authoring tool (this could be from authoring tool documentation or author experience with the tool).
  4. For each function in the list:
    1. Check that the function works correctly with the keyboard. If it does not, then select FAIL.
    2. If the function must be accessed by traversing keyboard focus through the authoring tool user interface, check whether a visible focus indicator is provided for the function's user interface controls. If there is not, then select FAIL.
    3. Check that the system never requires the user to press a key within a time period of less than 20 seconds. If this is ever the case, then select FAIL.
    4. Go to the next function in the list (if any).
  5. Select PASS (all functions must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) 1
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.1.4 testsComments on A.3.1.4
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) If the SC only ask for keyboard to work, then the test should not test for visible focus. WCAG 2.0 has SC 2.4.7 for focus visibility. If we need to solve the same problem, then we need an SC for that. We cannot add extraneous test per 4.2 for A.3.1.4 above just to pluck a hole in ATAG.

That goes the same for A.3.1.1. Step 4.2 is not acceptable.

5. A.3.1.5 test(s)

Success Criteria

A.3.1.5 Customize Keyboard Access: If the authoring tool includes keyboard commands, then those keyboard commands can be customized. (Level AAA)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Keyboard commands can be customized.

Test 0001 Author: Tim, Jan

  1. If the authoring tool does not include keyboard commands, then select SKIP.
  2. For the authoring tool, document all commands invoked via this keyboard interface (from user experience or authoring tool documentation).
  3. For each keyboard command:
    1. Search for a way to change the keyboard command such that another keyboard command can accomplish the same action (e.g., some tools have utilities that present all available actions and then allow the author to set which keyboard command activates each). If this is not possible for a command, then select FAIL.
    2. Go to the next keyboard command (if any).
  4. Select PASS (all keyboard commands must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 6
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group 1

Details

Responder A.3.1.5 test(s)Comments on A.3.1.5
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Isn't reasonable to require all keyboard commands be customizable. A number of applications do not permit the use of "reserved" commands for example if you want to change Cntrl+P for anything other than printing on the windows platform. This test does not address the issue of avoiding keyboard conflicts. Also AT may add an ability to "strap on" custom keyboard commands. Need to factor in the ability to accomodate adding keyboard shortcuts when using AT (JAWS bypass keys for instance).
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group The language for 3.1 rubs me the wrong way. If the test does a poor job in searching, then he/she may erroneously select fail. I think it can use improvement.

6. A.3.1.6 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Keyboard Commands can be associated with User Interface Components

Test 0001 Author: Tim, Jan

  1. If the authoring tool does not include keyboard commands, then select SKIP.
  2. For each user interface screen:
    1. Document all keyboard commands that can directly activate user interface components on this screen (from user experience or authoring tool documentation).
    2. For each user interface control that can be activated with a direct keyboard command:
      1. Check whether the command is visually associated with the control, either always or via any kind of keyboard command overlay. If not, then select FAIL.
      2. Go to the next user interface control that can be activated with a direct keyboard command (if any).
    3. Go to the next user interface screen (if any).
  3. Select PASS (all authoring tool user interface components must have associated keyboard command(s))

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 8
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.1.6 testsComments on A.3.1.6
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Accept the proposal

7. A.3.2.1 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: All time limits implement auto-save.

  1. Examine the user interface of the authoring tools for time limits on authoring sessions(e.g. automatic logout).
  2. If the authoring tool does not have any time limits, then select SKIP.
  3. For each time limit on an authoring session:
    1. Check to determine if the authoring tool can be configured (or is already configured) to automatically save any edits to web content before that time limit is reached. If not, then select FAIL.
    2. Test the functionality by authoring content and then allowing the time limit to occur. If the web content changes cannot be recovered, then select FAIL.
    3. Go to the next time limit on an authoring session (if any).
  4. Select PASS (all time limits must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 6
Recommend changes (see comments field) 1
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.2.1 testsComments on A.3.2.1
Roberto Scano The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) All ok for all but point 1 of text is ambiguos. What means? Sometimes the session autosave isn't viewable until some time (example: wordpress after 2 minutes display info that has autosaved the content). Suggest a text similar to A.3.2.4
Jan Richards Recommend changes (see comments field) TYPO: "sessions("
ADD: To (1) add "The time limit must be controlled by the authoring tool and not a larger system of which the authoring tool might be just a part.
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Accept the proposal

8. A.3.2.2 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Time limits et by authoring tools can be turned off, adjusted, extended, are real-time exceptions, are essential, or exceed 20 hours.

  1. Examine the user interface of the authoring tools for time limits (e.g. automatic logout).
  2. If the authoring tool does not have any time limits (e.g. an automatic logout), then select SKIP.
  3. For each time limit set by the authoring tool:
    1. If the authoring tool time limit is a real-time exception, meaning that 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, then go to the next time limit.
    2. If the time limit is essential and extending it would invalidate the activity, then go to the next time limit.
    3. If the time limit is longer than 20 hours, then go to the next time limit.
    4. If authors can turn off the time limit before encountering, then go to the next time limit.
    5. If authors are warned before each time limit expires and are 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, then go to the next time limit.
    6. If authors are allowed to adjust the time limit before encountering it, check the configuration parameters to insure that the time adjustment options are over a wide range that is at least ten times the length of the default setting. If this is true, then go to the next time limit.
    7. If the authoring tool has time limits, and none of the above statements are true, then select FAIL.
    8. Go to the next time limit (if any).
  4. Select PASS (all time limits must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field) 1
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.2.2 testsComments on A.3.2.2
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal What about tools like wordpress where the time limit is set via php-configuration? http://codex.wordpress.org/Editing_wp-config.php#Modify_AutoSave_Interval
Jan Richards Recommend changes (see comments field) TYPO: et-->set
ADD: To (1) add "The time limit must be controlled by the authoring tool and not a larger system of which the authoring tool might be just a part.
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Accept the proposal

9. A.3.2.3 tests

Success Criteria

A.3.2.3 Static Input Components: If authoring tool user interface components that accept input can move, then authors can pause the movement. (Level A)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: If components of the authoring tool user interface can move, the author can pause the movement.

  1. If no parts of the authoring tool user interface can move (e.g. animation, video or script), then select SKIP.
  2. For each part of the authoring tool user interface that can move:
    1. If there is no way to pause or stop motion (e.g. stop button, pause button), then select FAIL.
    2. Go to the next part of the authoring tool user interface that can move (if any).
  3. Select PASS (all moving parts of the user interface must have passed).

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.2.3 testsComments on A.3.2.3
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Animation and video are usually not used as user interface components. I think the examples are too misleading.

Likewise, the stop and pause buttons are usually only used for video. I don't think they are necessarily good examples in this context.

I advise to remove all the examples.

10. A.3.2.4 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: The authoring tool automatically saves edits or has a configuration option to automatically save edits.

  1. Check the preference settings and documentation. If there is an option to automatically save edits, activate that feature.
  2. Use a sample test file to load some content into the authoring tool. Make a noticeable, but minor change to the content. If there is a visible indication that the file has been automatically saved, select PASS.
  3. Otherwise, wait 5-10 minutes, close the file without manually saving the changes.
  4. Reopen the file. If the change you made is displayed correctly, select PASS. If the change was not saved, select FAIL.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 6
Recommend changes (see comments field) 1
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.2.4 testsComments on A.3.2.4
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Recommend changes (see comments field) CHANGE: "5-10 minutes" to "for a period that exceeds the auto-save period"
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Why 5-10 minutes? That seem arbitrary. Shouldn't the tester consult the documentation/instructional material for frequency? There may be other extraneous dependencies such as bandwidth constraints to consider. For example, auto save may turn off if using metered data connection, such as mobile data.

11. A.3.3.1 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: 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

  1. If the authoring tool cannot be used to edit time-based content such as video, animation, animated gifs etc., then select SKIP
  2. If the authoring tool does not include editing views that render visual time-based content such as video, animation, animated gifs etc., then select SKIP
  3. If the renderings are non-editable, such as previews, then select SKIP.
  4. Load sample video (audio, animation, animated gifs etc.)
  5. If the authoring tool can be set to never play time-based content automatically AND once playing the content can be paused, then PASS.
  6. If the editing view is web-based and the browser can be used to prevent auto-play and to pause the playing content then PASS.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 6
Recommend changes (see comments field) 1
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.3.1 testsComments on A.3.3.1
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Recommend changes (see comments field) ADD: 7. Otherwise, select FAIL.
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) There is a good possibility that the content will never be played automatically at all. If that is the case, it should not fail the SC. But we have the text "can be set to not play" in the SC, thus making scenarios in which the outcome of SC is achieve but doing so in a way that fails the SC because it was not "set".

We may need to revise the SC text a little.

12. A.3.4.1 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Markup elements (e.g., source code, content renderings) are selectable and navigation mechanisms are provided to move the selection focus between elements

  1. If the tool is designed such that markup elements are never disclosed to the author, select SKIP
  2. Where markup elements are disclosed to the user (e.g. document outline view, source view, etc.), if it is not possible to select a disclosed element without selecting any of the content that surrounds it, then select FAIL.
  3. If the only way to move selection from one disclosed element to the other is by clearing the selection and manually selecting the start and end point of the new element in the source, then select FAIL.
  4. Otherwise, select PASS.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) 1
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.4.1 testsComments on A.3.4.1
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) Shouldn't there be a step before 1 to determine if the tool even handle contents that contains structure? Some content format do not have structure as intended here.

I don't follow the text "if it is not possible to select a disclosed element without selecting any of the content that surrounds it". How is content selection related to navigation? The SC is about navigating to somewhere, not selecting things. If the content is right-protected, user may not be able to select a structure. But the ability to navigate can still be there.

Again, the text "If the only way to move selection from one disclosed element to the other is by clearing the selection and manually selecting the start and end point of the new element in the source" is about selection, not navigation.

13. A.3.4.2 tests

Success Criteria

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.

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Mechanisms are provided that support navigation between the related content.

  1. If the tool is designed such that programmatic relationships (ID reference, data structure definition, function definition, etc.) are never disclosed to the author, select SKIP
  2. If a mechanism exists that allows the user to navigate between pieces of web content (elements, functions, etc.) where there is a programmatic relationship (ID reference, data structure definition, function definition, etc.) then select PASS

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 5
Recommend changes (see comments field) 2
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.4.2 testsComments on A.3.4.2
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Recommend changes (see comments field) ADD 3. Otherwise, select FAIL.
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Not quite sure what this is saying. The way this is written "navigate between pieces of web content (elements, functions, etc.) where there is a programmatic relationship" implies you can navigate the code. Isn't the point to exploit the relationships and "flip flop" between elements where there is an established relationship?
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Recommend changes (see comments field) Shouldn't there be a step before 1 to determine if the tool even handle contents that contains structure? Some content format do not have structure as intended here.

There is very high likelihood that the relationship will appear in the form of tree structure. We should make that as an example to make the text more understandable.

14. A.3.5.1 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: All editing-views for enable text search where any text content that is editable by the editing-view is searchable, results can be made visible to authors and given focus, authors are informed when no results are found and search can be made forwards or backwards.

  1. If the authoring tool does not allow the editing of text content (e.g. because it is a graphics editor), then select SKIP.
  2. For each editing view that enables the editing of text content:
    1. Load the accessible test content file (any level), which contains non-text content with text alternatives, in the editing view.
    2. Choose a word from within the text and then determine whether a search function exists for the editing view that can find the word. In web-based tools, the search function may be part of the user agent. If this is not possible, then select FAIL.
    3. When a match is found, determine, whether the editing view is moved such that the found result is presented to the author. If this is not done, then select FAIL
    4. Determine whether search is possible forwards and backwards. If it is not, then select FAIL
    5. Choose a search term that is not in the content (e.g. a nonsense word) and search for it. If no indication is made of the failure of the search, then select FAIL
    6. If the editing view enables editing of text alternatives for non-text content, choose a search term from within the text alternative. If the term cannot be found, then select FAIL.
    7. Go to the next editing view that enables the editing of text content (if any).
  3. Select PASS (all of the editing views must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field) 1
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.5.1 testsComments on A.3.5.1
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal TYPO: "for enable"--> enable
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Recommend changes (see comments field) 2.2 It should be choose a word "that is repeated" from within the text.

2.2 the tester may be using a decent user agent and select fail because of a decision in the tester's part. If it does not work, then the tester needs to test with different user agents.

2.3 Please change to "...determine whether the editing view "can be" moved..." instead. The SC does not require an automatic move of focus.

15. A.3.6.1 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Authors can adjust display settings without modifying the web content being edited.

Test Author: Tim Boland & Jan Richards

  1. Determine (from the user interface or documentation) whether the authoring tool includes settings that affect how the content being edited is perceived by the author. If these settings exist, then document them. If not, then select SKIP.
  2. Create/open web content with the authoring tool.
  3. Determine a "method for testing how the web content will be experienced by end-users" (this may be as simple as opening the content in a user agent; or it may involve ending the authoring session).
  4. For each setting that affects how the content being edited is perceived by the author:
    1. Change the setting to a different value. Try to choose values that are as different as possible from the starting values, since this will make detecting differences easier.
    2. After changing each setting, save the content and then use the "method for testing how the web content will be experienced by end-users". If the end user experience has changed for any of the settings, then select FAIL.
    3. Go to the next setting that affects how the content being edited is perceived by the author (if any).
  5. Select PASS(all of the settings must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 6
Recommend changes (see comments field) 1
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) 1
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.6.1 testsComments on A.3.6.1
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) 4.2 isn't that the point the author makes a change, then the end use experience should change. I gather the point here is to separate authoring view from rendered view. The assertion might be clearer if written "Authors can adjust display settings of editing views without affecting the display of the final content."
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Recommend changes (see comments field) 4.2 is too abbreviated. I recommend to add the use of the same method used in step 3 to retrieve the content, make comparison of the results from step 3 and 4.3, if the difference between the result from step 3 & 4.3 is caused by the display change (some changes can be caused by timing, such as last updated date/time or other update--hopefully nobody add a plug-in or update patches in the meantime, but you never know).

16. A.3.6.2 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Preferences for display or control settings can be saved between authoring sessions.

  1. Determine (from the user interface or documentation) whether the authoring tool includes settings that affect how the author tool's user interface or the content being edited is perceived by the author (not the end-user). If these settings do not exist, then select SKIP.
  2. For each method of changing display or control settings (e.g. "Edit Preferences" utility):
    1. Does the preference or preference group include a control to allow the settings to be saved? If so, go to the next method of changing display or control settings.
    2. Make a change to a setting, then logout or end the authoring session. Then return back to the content being edited.
    3. If the setting change has persisted, go to the next method of changing display or control settings. If not, then select FAIL.
    4. Go to the next method of changing display or control settings (if any).
  3. Select PASS (all of the methods of changing display or control settings must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.6.2 testsComments on A.3.6.2
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Just wondering--do we really expect testers to test every setting? If it works for one, you'd think that all the rest should work. This is obviously different for product development testing, where the purpose is to find bugs. But it seems a bit much for ATAG context.

17. A.3.6.3 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: If the user makes a change to the platform display or control settings, then those changes appear in the authoring tool. If the user makes a change to the platform display or control settings and that change does NOT appear in the authoring tool, then the authoring tool has more specific display and control settings inside the authoring tool.

  1. If the platform for the authoring tool does not allow changes to the platform display or control settings, then select SKIP. [This should be rare that a platform does not allow any customization.]
  2. Change the platform (e.g. the Windows, Mac OS, or mobile device) accessibility settings(e.g. to high contrast mode or another settings change) from the platform accessibility options. Record the change made.
  3. Launch the authoring tool and observe whether the change made in step 2 is present in the display or controls of the authoring tool. If yes, select PASS.
  4. If the change made to the display or control settings in step 2 is not visible, then open the preference or settings menu. If the authoring tool allows more advanced customization that allowed by the platform, select PASS.
  5. If the authoring tool does not allow more customization of that setting or control that the platform, select FAIL.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 6
Recommend changes (see comments field) 2
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field)
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.6.3 testsComments on A.3.6.3
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Recommend changes (see comments field) TYPO: "settings("
CHANGE: 5 to "Otherwise, select FAIL."
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li Recommend changes (see comments field) This test is missing a step. To make comparisons, the tester needs to record the initial state of the tool before changing the platform setting. Step 3 should be to compare the results.

Step 4 ought to be "...If the authoring tool allows more specific display and control settings" instead...."

18. A.3.6.4 tests

Success Criteria

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)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: The authoring tool has the ability to save, name, and reload multiple configurations of settings.

  1. If Test 0001 for A.3.6.2 failed, then select FAIL.
  2. Determine (from the user interface or documentation) whether the authoring tool includes settings that affect how the user interface or the content being edited is perceived by the author. If these settings exist, then document them (you may reuse the documentation from A.3.6.2 tests). If not, then select SKIP.
  3. For each method of changing display or control settings (e.g. "Edit Preferences" utility):
    1. Does the method of changing display or control settings include functionality to enable saving and reloading various configurations of settings (e.g. the ability to save the current settings with a name)? If not, select FAIL.
    2. Save the current set of display and/or control settings.
    3. Make some changes to the display and/or control settings (preferable a change easy to distinguish) and then save them with a different name.
    4. Attempt to reload the original settings. Check if the settings you changed reverted correctly. If not, select FAIL.
    5. Go to the next method of changing display or control settings (if any).
  4. Select PASS (all of the methods of changing display or control settings must have passed)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.6.4 testsComments on A.3.6.4
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) Same comments for A.3.6.2--Just wondering--do we really expect testers to test every setting? If it works for one, you'd think that all the rest should work. This is obviously different for product development testing, where the purpose is to find bugs. But it seems a bit much for ATAG context.

19. A.3.7.1 tests

Success Criteria

A.3.7.1 Preview (Minimum): If a preview is provided, then at least one of the following is true: (Level A)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Previews use either in-market user agents or conform to Level A of the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 1.0.

Test Author: Greg Pisocky

  1. Determine from the user interface, online help, or documentation that the application provides a preview mode. If no preview mode exists, then select SKIP.
  2. For each opportunity to perform a preview:
    1. Create or open web content into the editing view.
    2. Invoke the content preview mode.
    3. Note the options for viewing content in the preview mode.
    4. If one of the options for viewing content in preview mode employs an in-market user agent (that can be procured by members of the public (free or otherwise). Usually, an in-market user agent will be a separate software from the authoring tool, however, sometimes a software may combine user agent and authoring tool functionality), then go to the next opportunity to perform a preview. (Note: if this is the case, the user agent need not meet UAAG)
    5. If the available preview mode is not in market, but it meets the User Agent Accessibility Test Procedure (Level A) then go to the opportunity to perform a preview.
    6. If the available preview mode does not meet the User Agent Accessibility Test Procedure (Level A), then select FAIL.
    7. Go to the next opportunity to perform a preview (if any).
  3. Then select PASS (all of the preview opportunities must have met the requirement)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.7.1 testsComments on A.3.7.1
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal There seems to be nested parenthesis or the sentence is not completely clear since in the two parenthesis there is an ending sentence. I'd suggest to extract the parenthesis content at the end of the main sentence as a note.

Point 4: If one of the options [...] employs an in-market user agent ( [...] (free or otherwise). Usually, [...] ), then go to the next opportunity to perform a preview.
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) What is an "opportunity to perform a preview"? I don't know what to make of it.

20. A.3.7.2 tests

Success Criteria

A.3.7.2 Preview (Enhanced): If a preview is provided, then authors can specify which user agent performs the preview. (Level AAA)

Test(s)

Test 0001 Assertion: Authors can choose from a set of in-market user agents for previews.

Test Author: Greg Pisocky

  1. Determine from the user interface, online help, or documentation that the application provides a preview mode. If no preview mode exists, then select SKIP.
  2. For each opportunity to perform a preview:
    1. Create or open web content into the editing view.
    2. If the preview option does not allow authors to specify which in-market user agent to use (that can be procured by members of the public (free or otherwise). Usually, an in-market user agent will be a separate software from the authoring tool, however, sometimes a software may combine user agent and authoring tool functionality), then select FAIL.
    3. Go to the next opportunity to perform a preview (if any).
  3. Then select PASS (all of the preview opportunities must have met the requirement)

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Accept the proposal 7
Recommend changes (see comments field)
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) 1
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field)
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group

Details

Responder A.3.7.2 testsComments on A.3.7.2
Roberto Scano Accept the proposal
Jan Richards Accept the proposal
Alessandro Miele Accept the proposal Same as on previous
Greg Pisocky Accept the proposal
Jeanne F Spellman Accept the proposal
Frederick Boland Accept the proposal
Sueann Nichols Accept the proposal
Alex Li The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) The most common way to meet this SC are to either select the default app from the OS or use open with. I think it should be noted.

Also, the most likely reason to fail this SC is that there is only one app capable of previewing a certain content format. Should we fail an authoring tool maker because of the market condition of a content format? I think we may want to reconsider...

This also brings up the fact that OS do this already. In fact, I can't think of an OS that does not. And the only real reason to fail is the popularity of the content format or lack there of. Is the SC still needed?

More details on responses

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Jutta Treviranus <jtreviranus@faculty.ocadu.ca>
  2. Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
  3. Andrew Ronksley <andrew.ronksley@rnib.org.uk>
  4. Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
  5. Cherie Ekholm <cheriee@exchange.microsoft.com>
  6. Tom Babinszki <tbabins@us.ibm.com>

Send an email to all the non-responders.


Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire


Maintained by Laurent Carcone, from a development by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org) on an original design by Michael Sperberg-McQueen $Id: showv.php3,v 1.129 2015/07/01 16:13:23 kahan Exp $. Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to lcarcone@w3.org with w3t-sys@w3.org copied (if your mail client supports it, send mail directly to the right persons)