Sally, Steve, All
FYI, Cynthia Shelly [CS] submitted comments that are similar to the
ones you submitted regarding requirement #37 [37] of the Widgets
Requirement LC WD [LC].
Both Marcos [MC] and I [AB] replied to Cynthia's comments. We agree
the wording in sentences #2 and #3 needs work and the tentative
resolution is to replace this requirement with text like:
[[
A conforming specification must specify that the language used to
declare the user interface of a widget be either HTML or a language
that is accessible as defined by [WCAG-2].
]]
Would you please let us know if the above text is acceptable or not
and if not, please elaborate on your concerns.
-Regards, Art Barstow
[CS] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008JulSep/
0109.html>
[37] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-widgets-reqs-20080625/#r37.->
[LC] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-widgets-reqs-20080625/>
[MC] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008JulSep/
0295.html>
[AB] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008JulSep/
0271.html>
On Jul 31, 2008, at 11:36 AM, ext Cain, Sally wrote:
Hi,
I would also like to comment on R37 Language Accessibility
Paragraph. I
will separate out the paragraph which holds the statements and then
comment under each section:
"...it SHOULD provide keyboard access to interactive graphical
elements..."
Steve has commented that this SHOULD, should be a MUST. I would
comment
to support that, unless there is another way to access these
interactive
elements via the keyboard. There must be a way to access the widget
using the keyboard.
"...and provide means to access the widget's functionality through an
non-graphical UI."
This statement above is also a SHOULD and not MUST. I think the key
thing and my comment is that it MUST provide keyboard accessibility to
the functionality whether it be through a graphical or non-
graphical UI.
"The declared interface MAY also be accessible to screen readers,
allowing relevant
sections of text and functionality to be accessed by non-visual
means."
I would also have concerned about this statement above being a MAY. As
Steve says the declared interface MUST be accessible to access
technologies and not just screen readers specifically.
I hope these comments are useful and again I hope I have not
misunderstood the context of these statements.
Sally Cain
Digital Accessibility Development Officer
RNIB
UK
Now online - The RNIB Software Access Centre. Helping you design,
procure and test for software accessibility. Go to:
www.rnib.org.uk/softwareaccesscentre
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Steven Faulkner
Sent: 31 July 2008 14:21
To: Arthur Barstow
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ext Marcos Caceres
Subject: Re: Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last
Call
WD
The current spec states:
"R37. Language Accessibility
A conforming specification must specify that the language used to
declare the user interface of a widget be either HTML or a language
that is accessible at various levels: it should provide keyboard
access to interactive graphical elements, and provide means to access
the widget's functionality through an non-graphical UI. The declared
interface may also be accessible to screen readers, allowing relevant
sections of text and functionality to be accessed by non-visual means.
Motivation:
Compatibility with other standards, current development practice or
industry best-practices, ease of use.
Rationale:
To recommend a language, or a set of languages, that will allow
authors to realize their designs, while at the same time remaining
accessible to screen readers and similar assistive technologies. "
In order for a widget to be accessible would it not be a MUST
requirement that keyboard access be provided or able to be provided
uisng the language of choice?
Also why is that the "declared interface may also be accessible to
screen readers"? again for it to be considered accessible would it not
be that a widget MUST be accessible to AT or abkle to be made
available using the language of choice?
apologies if I am missing something here.
regards
stevef
2008/7/31 Arthur Barstow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
This is a reminder August 1 is the end of the comment period for the
Widgets
1.0 Requirements Last Call Working Draft.
-Regards, Art Barstow
Begin forwarded message:
From: Arthur Barstow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: June 26, 2008 4:50:51 PM EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Marcos Caceres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last Call
WD
Al, P&F WG,
On June 25 the Web Applications WG published a Last Call Working
Draft of
the Widgets 1.0 Requirements document:
[[
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-widgets-reqs-20080625/>
Abstract: This document lists the design goals and requirements that
a
specification would need to address in order to standardize various
aspects
of widgets. Widgets are small client-side Web applications for
displaying
and updating remote data, that are packaged in a way to allow
download and
installation on a client machine, mobile phone, or mobile Internet
device.
Typical examples of widgets include clocks, CPU gauges, sticky
notes,
battery-life indicators, games, and those that make use of Web
services,
like weather forecasters, news readers, email checkers, photo albums
and
currency converters.
Introduction: A widget is an interactive single purpose application
for
displaying and/or updating local data or data on the Web,
packaged in
a way
to allow a single download and installation on a user's machine or
mobile
device. A widget may run as a stand alone application (meaning it
can
run
outside of a Web browser), or may be embedded into a Web
document. In
this
document, the runtime environment on which a widget is run is
referred to as
a widget user agent and a running widget is referred to as an
instantiated
widget. Prior to instantiation, a widget exists as a widget
resource.
For
more information about widgets, see the Widget Landscape document.
]]
We would appreciate any comments your WG has on this LC document,
especially those requirements relevant to your WG's domain/scope.
The
comment period ends 1 August 2008.
-Regards, Art Barstow
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium
www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
--
DISCLAIMER:
NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is
confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it
and any attachments from your system.
RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it
cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.
Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent
those of RNIB.
RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227
Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk
This message has been scanned for viruses by BlackSpider
MailControl - www.blackspider.com
