[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-accessibility] A tweak to the Section 4.5
Hi Mike, Sorry for the lack of clarity. There will NOT be a meeting this week. However, I hope everyone *except* Mike will review the draft content accessibility guidelines, and provide feedback on how they think ODF 1.1 meets those guidelines. I have already formed my own (positive) opinion, but would like to not be the only reviewer... Reminder: I need this ASAP, as I am to report tomorrow at 10am PT on this. This action item has been outstanding for some weeks now... Regards, Peter Korn Accessibility Architect, Sun Microsystems, Inc. > Peter - > > Not sure whether this is an indication of the whether this weeks meeting is > cancelled or not, given your unavailability. Please confirm. > > Second, I'm sure that everyone will understand that as TEITAC co-chair, it's > important for me to remain neutral to recommendations. So I won't be > contributing to this effort. However, I would encourage all other team > members, particulary our international contributors to offer their insight. > > Regards, > > Mike > > > Mike Paciello > Cell: +1.603.566.7713 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter.Korn@Sun.COM [mailto:Peter.Korn@Sun.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 3:35 PM > To: office-accessibility@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [office-accessibility] A tweak to the Section 4.5 > > Hi gang! > > I'm still about 5' under the frothing waves of my inbox (as compared to > the 75' of delightfully clear water I was under in Hawaii last week). > I'll try to get to my changes in the next couple of days. Meanwhile, I > understand from Rich that he won't be able to join/lead us in a meeting > this week. I daresay I won't be in a good position to do so either, > given the other deliverables I need to deliver on this week. > > I do have a related request of everyone - your feedback on the Section > 508 draft proposed requirements for document content accessibility (see > http://teitac.org/wiki/Web_and_Software:_Draft_2#Recommendations_on_a_new_se > ction_to_cover_content_formats) > which we discussed in the May 31 meeting, and which everyone took an > action item to review. > > I'm supposed to provide our feedback to the Web & Software subcommittee > of the Section 508 refresh effort at our meeting tomorrow, and I would > very much appreciate your feedback to add to my own. > > > Regards, > > Peter Korn > Accessibility Architect, > Sun Microsystems, Inc. > > >> Thank you! I have made all the changes including those from Janina and >> Steve. I am just waiting for Peter Korn's change for section 2.1. >> Peter may be back from vacation this week. I also removed a reference >> to LSR where we refer to Linux ATs. >> >> Here is the latest draft with edits. >> >> >> >> >> Rich >> >> >> >> Rich Schwerdtfeger >> Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist >> Chair, IBM Accessibility Architecture Review Board >> blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/schwer >> >> >> *"Steve Noble" <steven@dessci.com>* >> >> 06/21/2007 02:17 PM >> >> >> To >> <office-accessibility@lists.oasis-open.org> >> cc >> >> Subject >> [office-accessibility] A tweak to the Section 4.5 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> In regards to Section 4.5 "Preservation of MathML accessibility >> information" >> >> We need to change what is now three brief paragraphs, and replace it >> with only one paragraph below... >> >> 1) The existing (problematic) language: >> --begin-- >> MathML can be exported to XHTML for use by Firefox or Internet Explorer >> when used with the (free) MathPlayer plug-in, MathML also interfaces >> with screen readers to make the math accessible. MathML is supported in >> HTML by Internet Explorer and in an experimental version of Firefox. >> >> But in general, MathML support in HTML is problematic if cross-platform >> compatibility is required. For example, one industry approach to >> cross-platform compatibility, which has been use by the object tag in >> HTML??sentence not clear??. >> >> However, Internet Explorer's implementation of object tag does not >> follow the W3C guidelines and its rendering results are poor, so this >> approach is discouraged. >> --end-- >> >> 2) Rationale for change: >> The first sentence should have another comma, to make it clear >> MathPlayer is only required in IE. Also, to say MathML can be exported >> *to* XHTML isn't correct terminology. We should keep the XHTML and HTML >> statements parallel in that regard, and say "MathML is supported..." in >> both cases. Finally, the object tag reference is not constructive. There >> was some past proposal to use object tags for XML "islands" in HTML, but >> that's now been effectively left behind, so there's nothing to gain from >> mentioning it here. >> >> 3) The suggested revised language: >> --begin-- >> MathML is supported in XHTML by Firefox, or Internet Explorer when used >> with the (free) MathPlayer plug-in, which interfaces with screen readers >> to make the math accessible. MathML is also supported in HTML by >> Internet Explorer and in an experimental version of Firefox, but due to >> the lack of universal MathML implementation in all browsers, HTML >> cross-platform compatibility is difficult to ensure. >> --end-- >> >> This should do it. >> >> Steve Noble >> Director of Accessibility Policy >> Design Science, Inc. >> E-mail: SteveN@DesSci.com >> Phone: (502) 969-3088 >> http://www.dessci.com/accessibility >> >> > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]