Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (working draft)

Abstract

This document is part of a series of accessibility documents published by the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative.

Status of this document

This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or rendered obsolete by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use W3C Working Drafts as reference material or to cite them as other than "work in progress". This is work in progress and does not imply endorsement by either W3C or its member organizations.

The goals of the WAI AU Working Group are discussed in the WAI AU charter.

Please send comments about this document to the public mailing list: w3c-wai-au@w3.org, archived at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au

A list of the current AU Working Group members is available.

1. Introduction

Each checkpoint is intended to be specific enough that it can be verified, while being sufficiently general to allow developers the freedom to use the most appropriate strategies to meet the checkpoint.

The Techniques provided in the techniques document are suggestions for how implementation might be done, or where further information can be found. They are informative only, and other strategies may be used to meet the checkpoint as well as, or in place of, those discussed.

1.2 Checkpoint priorities

Each checkpoint has a priority level. The priority level reflects the impact of the checkpoint in meeting the goals of this document. These goals are:

• That the authoring tool be accessible
• That the authoring tool generate accessible content by default
• That the authoring tool encourage the creation of accessible content

The three priority levels are assigned as follows:

[Priority 1]

If the checkpoint is essential to meeting those goals

[Priority 2]

If the checkpoint is important to meeting those goals

[Priority 3]

If the checkpoint is beneficial to meeting those goals

[Relative Priority]

Some checkpoints talk about production, generation, checking etc of various content that have different priorities in WCAG. The priority for these checkpoints in ATAG varies according to the priority of the checkpoints in WCAG.

Relative Priority is used for ATAG checkpoints which relate to different types of content, to ensure that the priority of each feature matches the priority given to the feature in WCAG, as follows:

• It is priority 1 to implement the checkpoint for content features which are a priority 1 requirement in WCAG.
• It is priority 2 to implement the checkpoint for content features which are a priority 2 requirement in WCAG.
• It is priority 3 to implement the checkpoint for content features which are a priority 3 requirement in WCAG.

For example, checking for accessibility errors (4.1) has relative priority. This means that it is priority 1 for a tool to check for accessibility errors that are [WEB-CONTENT-PRIORITY] Priority 1, but priority 2 to check for accessibility errors that are [WEB-CONTENT-PRIORITY] Priority 2.

2. Guidelines

Guideline 1. Support accessible authoring practices

Methods for ensuring accessible markup vary with different markup languages. If markup is automatically generated, many authors will be unaware of the accessibility status of the final product unless they expend extra effort to make appropriate corrections by hand. Since many authors are unfamiliar with accessibility, the onus is on the authoring tool to generate accessible markup, and where appropriate, to guide the author in producing accessible content.

Many applications feature the ability to convert documents from other formats (e.g., Rich Text Format) into a markup format, such as HTML. Markup changes may also be made to facilitate efficient editing and manipulation. These processes are usually hidden from the user's view and may create inaccessible markup or cause inaccessible markup to be produced.

Checkpoints:

1.1 Ensure that the author can produce accessible content in the markup language(s) supported by the tool. [Priority 1]

Techniques for checkpoint 1.1

1.2 Ensure that the tool generates markup that conforms to the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT]. [Relative Priority]

Techniques for checkpoint 1.2

1.3 Ensure that templates provided by the tool conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT]. [Relative Priority]

Techniques for checkpoint 1.3

1.4 Ensure that the tool preserves all accessibility information during authoring, transformations and conversions. [Priority 1]

Techniques for checkpoint 1.4

Guideline 2. Generate standard markup

Conformance with standards promotes interoperability and accessibility. Where applicable use W3C Recommendations, which have been reviewed to ensure accessibility and interoperability. If there are no applicable W3C Recommendations, use a published standard that enables accessibility.

Checkpoints:

2.1 Use the latest versions of W3C Recommendations when they are available and appropriate for a task. [Priority 2]

These specifications have undergone review specifically to ensure that they do not compromise, and where possible they enhance, accessibility.

Techniques for checkpoint 2.1

2.2 Ensure that the tool generates valid markup. [Priority 1]

This is necessary for user agents to be able to transform Web content to a presentation appropriate to a particular user's needs.

Techniques for checkpoint 2.2

2.3 If markup generated by the tool differs from W3C specifications, inform the author. [Priority 3]

This allows the author to choose to conform.

Techniques for checkpoint 2.3

Guideline 3. Support the creation of accessible content

Generating equivalent information, such as textual alternatives for images and audio descriptions of video, can be one of the most challenging aspects of Web design. Along with the necessity for structural information it is a cornerstone of accessible design, allowing information to be presented in a way most appropriate for the needs of the user without constraining the creativity of the author.

Automating the mechanics of this process, by prompting authors to include the relevant information at appropriate times, can greatly ease the burden for authors. Where such information can be mechanically determined (e.g., the function of icons in an automatically-generated navigation bar, or expansion of acronyms from a dictionary) and offered as a choice for the author the tool will assist the author, at the same time as it reinforces the need for such information and the author's role in ensuring that it is used appropriately in each instance.

Checkpoints:

3.1 Assist the author in providing alternative information (e.g., captions, long descriptions of graphics). [Relative Priority]

Techniques for checkpoint 3.1

3.2 Help the author create structured content and separate information from its presentation. [Relative Priority]

Techniques for checkpoint 3.2

3.3 Ensure that prepackaged content conforms to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT]. [Relative Priority]

For example include synchronized text and audio equivalents with movies. Refer also to checkpoint 3.4.

Techniques for checkpoint 3.3

3.4 Do not insert automatically generated or place-holder equivalent alternatives. [Priority 1]

For example, in an automatically generated navigation bar, "search" may be appropriate alternative information for a button linked to a search function, but the filename of an image should not be inserted as a default.

Note. Human-authored content may be available for an object whose function is known with certainty. Refer also to checkpoint 3.5 Provide a mechanism to manage alternative information for multimedia objects, that retains and offers for editing pre-written or previously linked alternative information. [Priority 3] and checkpoint 3.3 Ensure that prepackaged content conforms to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT]. [Relative Priority] .

Techniques for checkpoint 3.4

3.5 Provide a mechanism to manage alternative information for multimedia objects, that retains and offers for editing pre-written or previously linked alternative information. [Priority 3]

Techniques for checkpoint 3.5

Guideline 4. Provide methods of checking and correcting inaccessible content

Many authoring tools allow authors to create documents with little or no knowledge about the underlying markup. To ensure accessibility, authoring tools must be designed so that they can automatically identify inaccessible markup, and enable its correction even when the markup itself is hidden from the author.

In supporting the creation of accessible Web content, authoring tools should take into account the differing authoring styles of their users. In general, authors will prefer to be able to configure their tools to support their working style. Tools that allow such configuration can help authors to feel that accessible authoring is a natural practice (refer also to the previous guideline) rather than an intrusion on their normal work pattern. For example some users may prefer to be alerted to problems when they occur, whereas others may prefer to perform a check after the document is completed. This is analogous to programming environments that allow users to decide whether to check for correct code during editing or at compile time.

Note. Many assistive technologies used with browsers and multimedia players are only able to provide access to Web documents that use valid mark-up. Therefore validation of mark-up is an essential aspect of authoring tool accessibility.

Checkpoints:

4.1 Check for and alert the author to accessibility problems. [Relative Priority]

Some accessibility problems cannot be detected automatically, and will require the user to make decisions.

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 4.1

Techniques for checkpoint 4.2

4.3 Allow the author to preserve markup not recognized by the tool. [Priority 2]

Note. The author may have included or imported markup that is not recognized by the tool, but which enhances accessibility.

Techniques for checkpoint 4.3

4.4 Provide the author with a summary of the document accessibility status. [Priority 3]

Techniques for checkpoint 4.4

4.5 Allow the author to transform presentation markup that is misused to convey structure into structural markup, and to transform presentation markup that is stylistic into style sheet markup. [Priority 3]

Techniques for checkpoint 4.5

Guideline 5. Integrate accessibility solutions into the overall "look and feel"

When a new feature is added to an existing software tool without proper integration, the result is often an obvious discontinuity. Differing color schemes, fonts, interaction styles and even application stability can be factors affecting user acceptance of the new feature.

Checkpoints:

5.1 Ensure that functionalities related to accessible Authoring practices are integrated into the tool. [Priority 2]

Techniques for checkpoint 5.1

5.2 Ensure that the [WEB-CONTENT-PRIORITY] Priority 1 accessible authoring practices are among the most obvious and easily initiated by the author. [Priority 2]

Techniques for checkpoint 5.2

Guideline 6. Promote accessibility in help and documentation

The issues surrounding Web accessibility are often unknown to Web authors. Help and documentation should explain accessibility problems and solutions, with examples.

Checkpoints:

6.1 Document all features that promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 1]

Techniques for checkpoint 6.1

6.2 Ensure that creating accessible content is a naturally integrated part of the documentation, including examples. [Priority 2]

Techniques for checkpoint 6.2

6.3 In a dedicated section, document all features of the tool that promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 3]

Techniques for checkpoint 6.3

Guideline 7. Ensure that the Authoring Tool is Accessible to Authors with Disabilities

The authoring tool is a software program with standard user interface elements and as such should follow relevant user interface accessibility guidelines. In addition to applicable general interface accessibility guidelines there are interface design considerations that are specific to Web authoring tools.

One such consideration is that the author may need a different presentation to edit the Web content than the one they wish ultimately to be displayed. This implies display preferences that do not manifest themselves in the ultimate markup or style declarations.

Another consideration relates to the process of navigating and manipulating the document while authoring. Authoring Web content requires editing a potentially large and complex document. In order to edit a document the author must be able to locate and select specific elements, efficiently traverse the document, and quickly find and mark insertion points. Authors who use screen readers, refreshable braille displays, or screen magnifiers can make limited use (if at all) of visual artifacts that communicate the structure of the document and act as sign posts when traversing the document. Authors who use keyboard and mouse alternatives must make tiring repetitions of movement commands to navigate the document. There are strategies that make it easier to navigate and manipulate a marked-up document. Using the structure of a Web document, the author can be given a view of the document which allows the author to both get a good sense of the overall document and to navigate that document more easily.

Checkpoints:

7.1 Use all applicable operating system and accessibility standards and conventions (Priority 1 for standards and conventions which are essential to accessibility, Priority 2 for those that are important to accessibility, Priority 3 for those that are beneficial to accessibility). [Priority 1]

Techniques for checkpoint 7.1

7.2 Allow the author to change the presentation within editing views without affecting the document markup. [Priority 1]

This allows the author to edit the document according to their personal requirements, without changing the way the document looks or is rendered when published.

Techniques for checkpoint 7.2

7.3 Allow the author to edit all properties of each element and object in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1]

Techniques for checkpoint 7.3

7.4 Ensure the editing view allows navigation via the structure of the document in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1]

Techniques for checkpoint 7.4

7.5 Enable editing of the structure of the document in an accessible fashion. [Priority 2]

Techniques for checkpoint 7.5

7.6 Allow the author to search within editing views. [Priority 2]

Techniques for checkpoint 7.6

3. Terms and Definitions

Accessible, Accessibility

Within these guidelines, Accessible and Accessibility are used in the sense of being accessible to people regardless of disability.

To understand the accessibility issues relevant to authoring tool design, consider that many users may be creating documents in contexts very different from your own:

• They may not be able to see, hear, move, or may not be able to process some types of information easily or at all;
• They may have difficulty reading or comprehending text;
• They may not have or be able to use a keyboard or mouse;
• They may have a text-only display, or a small screen.

In addition, accessible design will benefit many people who do not have a physical disability but with similar needs. For example they may be working in a noisy environment and unable to hear, or need to use their eyes for another task, and be unable to view a screen. They may be using a small mobile device, with a small screen, no keyboard and no mouse.

Accessibility Awareness

The term accessibility awareness is used to describe an application that has been designed to maximize the ease of use of the interface and its products for people with differing needs, abilities and technologies. In the case of authoring tools, this means that (1) care has been taken to ensure that the content produced by user-authors is accessible and (2) that the user interface has been designed to be usable with a variety of display and control technologies.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility information is content, including information and markup, which is used to improve the accessibility of a document.

Accessibility Solution, Accessible Authoring Practice

These terms refer to Authoring practices that improve the accessibility of content generated by the tool.

Alerts

Alerts notify the author of something, or mark something for the author's attention. They may or may not require author response.

Alternative Presentations and Alternative Information

Certain types of content may not be accessible to all users (e.g., images or audio presentations), so alternative representations are used, such as transcripts for audio, or short functionally equivalent text (e.g., "site map link") and/or descriptive text equivalents (e.g., "Graph 2.5 shows that the population has doubled approximately every ten years for the last fifty years, increasing from about 10 million to 330 million in that time"). An object may have several alternative representations, for example a video, captions of the audio, audio description of the video, a series of still images, and textual representations of each of these.

Attributes

in XML and HTML, an element may have any number of attributes. In the following example, the attributes of the beverage element are flavor, which has the value "lots", and colour, which has the value "red": <beverage flavor="lots" colour="red">my favorite</beverage> Some attributes are integral to document accessibility (e.g., the "alt", "title", and "longdesc" attributes in HTML

Authoring Tool

As used in this document, an Authoring Tool is any software that is used to generate content for publishing on the Web. Refer also to section 1.3 Scope of these guidelines.

Automated Markup Insertion Function

Automated markup insertion functions are the features of an authoring tool that allow the user to produce markup without directly typing it. This includes a wide range of tools from simple markup insertion aids (such as a bold button on a toolbar) to markup managers (such as table makers that include powerful tools such as "split cells" that can make multiple changes) to high level site building wizards that produce almost complete documents on the basis of a series of user preferences.

Conversion Tool

A Conversion Tool is any application or application feature that allows content in some other format (proprietary or not) to be converted automatically into a particular markup language. This includes software whose primary function is to convert documents to a particular markup language as well as "save as HTML" (or other markup language) features in non-markup applications.

Document

A document is a series of elements that are defined by a language (e.g., HTML 4.0 or an XML application).

Editing an element

Editing View

What is displayed by the authoring tool to the author during the editing process.

Element

An element is any identifiable object within a document, for example a character, word, image, paragraph or spreadsheet cell. In HTML and XML an element refers to a pair of tags and their content, or an "empty" tag - one that requires no closing tag or content.

Generation Tool

A Generation Tool is a program or script that produces automatic markup "on the fly" by following a template or set of rules. The generation may be performed on either the server or client side.

Image Editor

A graphics program that provides a variety of options for altering images of different formats.

Inaccessible Markup, Inaccessible Element, Inaccessible Attribute, Inaccessible Authoring Practice and Access Barrier

These terms are used to mean markup or practices which do not meet (or produce content which does not meet) checkpoints of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT].

Markup Language

The term markup language is used in this document to refer to the encoding language of a document, such as HTML, SVG, or MathML.

Multi-media Authoring Tool

Software that facilitates integration of diverse media elements into an comprehensive presentation format. May incorporate video, audio, images, animations, simulations, and other interactive components.

Prompts

Prompts are requests for user input, either information or a decision. Prompts require author response.

Property

A property is a piece of information about an element, for example structural information (e.g., it is item number 7 in a list, or plain text) or presentation information (e.g., that it is marked as bold, its font size is 14). In XML and HTML properties of an element include the name of the element (e.g., IMG or DL), the values of its attributes, and information associated by means of a style sheet. In a database, properties of a particular element may include values of the entry, and acceptable data types for that element.

Publishing Tool

A tool that allows content to be uploaded in an integrated fashion. Sometimes these tools makes changes such as local hyper-reference modifications. Although these tools sometimes stand alone, they may also be integrated into site management tools.

Rendered Content

The rendered content is that which an element actually causes to be rendered by the user agent. This may differ from the element's structural content. For example, some elements cause external data to be rendered (e.g., the IMG element in HTML), and in some cases, browsers may render the value of an attribute (e.g., "alt", "title") in place of the element's content.

Site Management Tool

A tool that provides an overview of an entire Web site indicating hierarchical structure. It will facilitate management through functions that may include automatic index creation, automatic link updating, and broken link checking.

Transcripts

A transcript is a line by line record of all dialog and action within a video or audio clip.

Transformation

A process whereby one object is changed, according to a discrete set of rules, into another, equivalent, object. This includes any application or application feature that allows content that is marked up in a particular markup language to be transformed into another markup language, such as software that allows the author to change the DTD defined for the original document to another DTD. .

User Agent

The term User Agent in this document refers to an application which is used to read web content, such as a browser, a plug-in for a particular media type, or a piece of assistive technology.

User Configurable Schedule

A user configurable schedule allows the user to determine the type of prompts and alerts that are used, including when they are presented.

Video Captions

A video caption is a textual message that is stored in the text track of a video file. The video caption describes the action and dialog for the scene in which it is displayed.

Video Editor

A tool that facilitates the process of manipulating video images. Video editing includes cutting segments (trimming), re-sequencing clips, and adding transitions and other special effects.

Views

An authoring tool may offer several views of the same document. For instance, one view may show raw markup, a second may show a structured tree view, a third may show markup with rendered objects while a final view shows an example of how the document may appear if it were to be rendered by a particular browser.

Markup Language

The term markup language is used in this document to refer to the encoding language of a document, such as HTML, SVG, or MathML.

4. Acknowledgments

Many thanks to the following people who have contributed through review and comment: Jim Allan, Denis Anson, Kitch Barnicle, Kynn Bartlett, Harvey Bingham, Judy Brewer, Carl Brown, Dick Brown, Wendy Chisholm, Rob Cumming, Daniel Dardailler, Mark Day, BK Delong, Martin Dürst, Kelly Ford, Jamie Fox, Edna French, Sylvain Galineau, Al Gilman, Eric Hansen, Phill Jenkins, Len Kasday, Brian Kelly, Marja-Riitta Koivunen, Sho Kuwamoto, Jaap van Lelieveld, William Loughborough, Karen McCall, Charles Oppermann, Dave Pawson, Dave Poehlman, Bruce Roberts, Chris Ridpath, Gregory Rosmaita, Janina Sajka, Jim Thatcher, Irène Vatton, Gregg Vanderheiden, Pawan Vora, Jason White, and Lauren Wood.

5. References

For the latest version of any W3C specification please consult the list of W3C Technical Reports.