On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 04:13:46 +0530, Pearson, Elaine <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> >But to do that well, we
> need a way to record when a resource has been evaluated and found to be
> missing a particular access feature that some users need, to
> distinguish it from a resource that hasn't been checked at all (or
> hasn't had that particular feature evaluated).
EARL was dsigned to allow that to be done. Hera, the tool developed by
Sidar a
few years ago (which produces EARL, but an old version), starts out marking
things that are known to pass or fail certain requirements, as well as
things
where it is unknown, or untested, or the requirement makes no sense in the
context of whatever is being tested.
http://sidar.org/hera will let you try it out. The navigation isn't always
clear
to me, so hover the icons and find out what they do. But it is pretty
straightforward to use ...
cheers
Chaals
> My group (the Accessibility Research Centre) at University of Teesside
> are currently exploring the potential for Web 2.00 tools to meet this
> requirement.
> Elaine
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: DCMI Accessibility Community on behalf of Madeleine Rothberg
> Sent: Thu 08/02/2007 19:38
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Not accessible or not adaptable.
>
>
>
> Elaine,
> Handling those individual needs is exactly what the metadata is
> designed for. I agree completely with your position. The new items I
> suggested below are very specific, allowing the resource to be labeled
> with precisely the ways it is or is not accessible (font color, font
> size, mouse use, visual versus text, etc). This is not a blanket
> statement of accessible or inaccessible. It is intended to be matched
> to each user's profile of accessibility needs. But to do that well, we
> need a way to record when a resource has been evaluated and found to be
> missing a particular access feature that some users need, to
> distinguish it from a resource that hasn't been checked at all (or
> hasn't had that particular feature evaluated).
>
> -Madeleine
>
> On Feb 8, 2007, at 12:48 PM, Pearson, Elaine wrote:
>
>> Accessibility or inaccessibility depends on the user. It is too
>> simplistic to say something is accessible or inaccessible. It depends
>> on who is using it. For someone with good vision but learning
>> difficulties, and alt tag may be of no use at all, nor would a text
>> only page, whereas it may be very satisfactory for a blind user. A
>> sight that is largely graphics or animations may be great to the user
>> with learning difficulties but no use to a blind user. There is no
>> such things as accessible or inaccessible, so stating something in
>> negative terms is not necessarily helpful.
>>
>> Elaine
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: DCMI Accessibility Community on behalf of Madeleine Rothberg
>> Sent: Thu 08/02/2007 14:33
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Not accessible or not adaptable.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think Lisa has stated the problem very clearly:
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2007, at 4:02 AM, lisa wrote:
>>> I do not think anyone care about the intent. The question is this
>>> known to
>>> be inaccessible, or is it just a case of no one wrote the meta data
>>> to say
>>> it is accessible.
>>
>> And I think that we have not entirely solved that problem in our
>> metadata model. For some areas, we have. If you state that a resource
>> contains visual content but do not state that it has text alternatives,
>> it is clear that it is inaccessible to someone who can't use visuals.
>> But for the interface flexibility and display transformability
>> elements, we may need to enhance the vocabularies to permit stating the
>> negative result. Currently the vocab for interface flexibility is:
>> full_keyboard_control, full_mouse_control (ISO version) or
>> keyboard only control, mouse only control (most recent DC page I could
>> find)
>>
>> The intent of this element (when I proposed it) was to inform users who
>> must use the keyboard whether they could entirely control the resource
>> with the keyboard. It was tricky to get the wording right to imply that
>> concept rather then the negative one -- "keyboard only control" sounds
>> like it means your mouse won't work. I think the ISO wording is closer
>> to conveying the positive meaning, though I welcome other suggestions.
>>
>> But the need Emmanuelle raised, and Lisa has restated, is to have both
>> positive and negative statements available, such as:
>> full_keyboard_control
>> keyboard_required
>> full_mouse_control
>> mouse_required
>>
>> With that vocabulary, we can express that we have checked a resource
>> and it requires the mouse. With the two-item vocabulary, we would need
>> to skip that element and not express the result of our test if we find
>> that the resource requires both mouse and keyboard to be used. (One
>> distracting but important side issue: users who can only use a mouse
>> generally use an onscreen keyboard, so they need to have an appropriate
>> profile to indicate they can use either mouse-driven or keyboard-driven
>> resources. It is the users who can't use a mouse who have more trouble
>> here, I believe.)
>>
>> The list of display transformations is longer, but putting a not prefix
>> in front of each one may be fine:
>> variable font size
>> invariable font size
>> variable font face
>> invariable font face
>> variable foreground colour
>> ditto
>> variable background colour
>> ditto
>> variable cursor
>> ditto
>> variable highlight
>> ditto
>> variable layout
>> ditto
>> variable reading rate
>> ditto
>> structured presentation
>> unstructured presentation
>>
>> This doubles the size of the vocabs, but I think it meets an important
>> need. I am interested in your opinions.
>>
>> -Madeleine
>>
>> ----------------------------
>> Madeleine Rothberg
>> Chair, IMS Accessibility Special Interest Group
>> Director of R&D
>> Carl and Ruth Shapiro Family National Center for Accessible Media at
>> WGBH
>> http://ncam.wgbh.org <http://ncam.wgbh.org/> <http://ncam.wgbh.org/>
>> [log in to unmask]
>> 617-300-2492 (voicemail)
>>
--
Charles McCathieNevile Fundacion Sidar
[log in to unmask] +61 409 134 136 http://www.sidar.org
|