WAI AU -- 06 Dec 2010

<scribe> Scribe: Jan

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0091.html

<jeanne> jeanne is available

JT: We will meet Dec 13, 20 Jan 3, 10

http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2010/ED-IMPLEMENTING-ATAG20-20101206/

2. Traversing draft with rewording proposals (search for "@@")

@@Note: Some of the other success criteria in Part A are based on WCAG 2.0. This helps ensure that non-web-based authoring tools meet the same requirements as web-based tools. If the requirement has been modified from the WCAG 2.0 wording in order to more appropriately apply to authoring tools, rather than web content in general, then this will be noted.

<scribe> ACTION: Jan to do a normative note for A.1.1.1 that explains what SC's a web based tool does not have to do [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/12/06-au-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-312 - Do a normative note for A.1.1.1 that explains what SC's a web based tool does not have to do [on Jan Richards - due 2010-12-13].

@@The intent of this success criterion is to ensure that authoring tool user interfaces that are not web applications are accessible to authors with disabilities. In formulating a requirement that would best fulfill this intent, the Working Group decided upon a requirement to follow (and cite in conformance claims) existing accessibility guidelines because...

The intent of this success criterion is to ensure that authoring tool user interfaces that are not web applications are accessible to authors with disabilities. Existing accessibility guidelines are referenced bacause:

Resoultion: The intent of this success criterion is to ensure that authoring tool user interfaces that are not web applications are accessible to authors with disabilities. Existing accessibility guidelines are referenced because:

Changes in A.1.2.2 Platform Accessibility Services

Resolution: The intent of this success criterion is to ensure that authoring tool user interfaces that are not web applications are accessible to authors with disabilities who use assistive technologies that communicate with software via platform accessibility services. The requirement is stated generally because the specifics of what constitutes a platform accessibility service differs on...
... each platform. The note that conformance claims must cite the the platform accessibility service(s) implemented should encourage developers to refrain from implementing services that are not supported by assistive technologies.

A.2.1.1 Alternative Content:

Resolution: "Programmatically Associated" rather than "recognized"

<scribe> ACTION: Jan to outline A.2.1.1 Alternative Content in an email [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/12/06-au-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-313 - Outline A.2.1.1 Alternative Content in an email [on Jan Richards - due 2010-12-13].

A.3.1.3 Efficient Keyboard Access

@@The intent of this success criterion is to introduce a Level AA requirement to strengthen the requirement of Success Criterion A.3.1.1. That success criterion would be met even by a keyboard access mechanism in which users had to sequentially navigate through every available user interface component in order to reach their intended destination. The current success criterion (A.3.1.3)...

scribe: introduces the additional requirement that keyboard access must include mechanisms to make it more efficient that this type of purely sequential keyboard navigation.

The wording is intentionally general because the appropriate mechanisms available for increasing the efficiency of keyboard access vary according to the operating environment and the design of the authoring tool:

In desktop environments with a full keyboard, there is generally some set of keys available for developers to use as shortcut keys that directly link to particular functionality (e.g. the "ctrl" + "S" key combination can be directly mapped to the "Save" function).

In web-based environments very few direct shortcut keys are available, once the potential keys used by the various operating systems, user agents and assistive technologies are taken into account. In this case, bypass links are useful mechanisms for making keyboard access more efficient.

In mobile environments, the situation is variable. Some mobile environments include full, physical keyboards and support keyboard shortcuts. Other mobile environments do not enable keyboard shortcuts, but often increase keyboard navigation efficiency via recommending the use of tabs and other organizational mechanisms.

Resolution: @@The intent of this success criterion is to introduce a Level AA requirement to strengthen the requirement of Success Criterion A.3.1.1. That success criterion would be met even by a keyboard access mechanism in which users had to sequentially navigate through every available user interface component in order to reach their intended destination. This success criterion (A.3.1.3)...
... introduces the additional requirement that keyboard access must include mechanisms to make it more efficient that this type of purely sequential keyboard navigation. The wording is intentionally general because the appropriate mechanisms available for increasing the efficiency of keyboard access vary according to the operating environment and the design of the authoring tool:In desktop...
... environments with a full keyboard, there is generally some set of keys available for developers to use as shortcut keys that directly link to particular functionality (e.g. the "ctrl" + "S" key combination can be directly mapped to the "Save" function). In web-based environments very few direct shortcut keys are available, once the potential keys used by the various operating systems,...
... user agents and assistive technologies are taken into account. In this case, bypass links are useful mechanisms for making keyboard access more efficient.In mobile environments, the situation is variable. Some mobile environments include full, physical keyboards and support keyboard shortcuts. Other mobile environments do not enable keyboard shortcuts, but often increase keyboard...
... navigation efficiency via recommending the use of tabs and other organizational mechanisms.

A.3.6.1 Independence of Display

When "WYSIWYG authoring tools" are referred to in the examples, it is with the understanding that browsers will differ in their renderings of the same content and that end users are often free to override the default presentation of web content.

When "WYSIWYG authoring tools" are referred to in the examples, it is with the understanding that browsers will differ in rendering of the same content and that end users are often free to override the default presentation of web content.

Resolution: When "WYSIWYG authoring tools" are referred to in the examples, it is with the understanding that browsers will differ in rendering of the same content and that end users are often free to override the default presentation of web content.

A.3.6.5 Preferences Assistance

Resolution: "authoring tool display settings and control settings"

A.4.1.4 Content Changes Reversible (Enhanced)

@@The intent of this success criterion is to establish an enhanced Leve AAA requirement for reversing inadvertent actions. Everyone makes mistakes, but some people with some disabilities have more difficulty creating error-free input. In addition, it may be harder for some people with disabilities to detect that they have made an error, so it is more likely that they will need to reverse a...

scribe: series of actions once the error is discovered.

<scribe> ACTION: Jan to clarify that series means more than one and in the same session [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/12/06-au-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-314 - Clarify that series means more than one and in the same session [on Jan Richards - due 2010-12-13].

Also note can't be done in multi-author enviornment

- DRAFT -

WAI AU

06 Dec 2010

Attendees

Contents