RE: Survey for AUWG for 27 May (in place of meeting)
"Richards, Jan" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.w3c.accessibility.tools |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi all, Thanks for the answers so far! Alex, in particular, made a few comments that I'd like to comment on: --- Q: The need for positive reframing of the IF clause in select success criteria: Alex: "Don't agree with charactering the wording as dangerous" JR: You're right, I probably should have said something like "complicating" instead of "dangerous". --- Q: A.3.2.1: Alex suggests: "The authoring tools does not include session time limits or the authoring tool can automatically save edits made before the session time limits." JR: I agree with Alex's wording. --- Q: A.3.3.1: Alex suggests: For authoring tool that plays visual time-based content, one of the following is true: a) The visual time-based content does not play automatically b) The visual time-based content can be set to not play automatically c) The visual time-based content can be paused JR: I'd prefer not to have Pause OR auto-play, but I can see you are trying to remove the requirement for a setting, so how about (I've also removed "render" since it is implied by play)?: A.3.3.1 Static View Option: If an editing-view can play visual time-based content, then playing is not necessarily automatic upon loading the content and playing can be paused. (Level A) --- Q: B.2.1.1 Alex: Copy and paste error in the survey. It should be, "B.2.1.1 Accessible Content Possible (WCAG): The authoring tool does not place restrictions on the web content that authors can specify or those restrictions do not prevent WCAG 2.0 success criteria from being met. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria)" JR: This looks the same to me...maybe Jeanne fixed the survey?... Alex: Do you agree with the text you pasted in? --- Q: B.2.3.2 Alex: When did we add "semi-automatically" in the SC text? What does that mean? Is that testable? I'm okay with the rest. JR: It was always there and is a define term (http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2012/ED-IMPLEMENTING-ATAG20-20120924/#def-Semi-Automated-Checking) - though a link is MISSIING in the document - that basically means that a person's judgement is required. For example, showing a alt field in an image insertion dialog filled with "Image" would be a failing semi-automated repair. Not showing the field and simply putting "Image" into the markup would be a failing fully automated repair. --- Cheers, Jan (MR) JAN RICHARDS PROJECT MANAGER INCLUSIVE DESIGN RESEARCH CENTRE (IDRC) OCAD UNIVERSITY T 416 977 6000 x3957 F 416 977 9844 E [email protected] > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeanne Spellman [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: May-23-13 12:13 PM > To: AUWG > Subject: Survey for AUWG for 27 May (in place of meeting) > > Survey that replaces the meeting of 27 May. Please answer the survey > before Monday (US holiday) so that we do not fall behind our timeline. > There are 9 questions. > > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20130523/ > > New survey on rewording "If clause" success criteria to make it easier to find > implementations. The "if" clauses are making it difficult to identify tools that > match an undesirable behavior. These changes should not change the > meaning or intent of the success criteria, just make it easier identify tools > with desirable behavior.