Techniques for Authoring Tool Accessibility

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 Working Draft of the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines. It 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 members of the WAI Authoring Tool (AU) Working Group.

This draft is a public working draft, and represents the state of the working group document at 21 June 1999. It has since been released to the WAI interest group for review, and no changes or clarifications were sought. In the time between that document being published as a review draft and this publication as a publication there have been two newer working group drafts published - the latest working group draft is also publicly available. A log of changes between successive working drafts is available.

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

1.1 Scope of the Guidelines

The guidelines are intended to be used by developers of all tools used to produce content for the Web. These include:

• Editing tools specifically designed to produce Web content (e.g., WYSIWYG HTML editors, SMIL authoring packages);
• Tools that offer the option of saving material in a Web format (e.g., word processors or desktop publishing packages);
• Tools that translate documents into Web formats (e.g., filters to translate desktop publishing formats to HTML);
• Tools that produce multimedia, especially where it is intended for use on the Web (e.g., video production and editing suites);
• Tools for site management or site publication, including on-the-fly conversion and Web site publishing tools;
• Tools for management of layout (e.g., CSS formatting tools).

1.2 Guidelines, Checkpoints, and Techniques

The guidelines documents have been organized to address readers seeking abstract principles of accessible authoring tool design and readers seeking concrete solutions. The guidelines documents define three terms for different levels of abstraction:

Guideline

A guideline is a general principle of accessible authoring tool design. A guideline addresses the question "What accessibility issues should I be aware of?"

Checkpoint

A checkpoint is a specific way of satisfying one or more guidelines. While checkpoints describe verifiable actions that may be carried out by the authoring tool developer, implementation details are described elsewhere. A checkpoint answers the question "What must/should/may I do to make an authoring tool (and the content it produces) accessible?"

Technique

A technique is an example of, or further information about implementation of a checkpoint. A technique answers the question "How might I implement that in an authoring tool?"

1.3 Checkpoint priorities

There are three goals:

1. The authoring tool is accessible
2. The authoring tool generates accessible content
3. The authoring tool encourages the creation of accessible content

Checkpoints are assigned priority according to how important they are to meeting those goals:

[Priority 1]

Essential to meeting those goals

[Priority 2]

Important to meeting those goals

[Priority 3]

Beneficial to meeting those goals

2 Guidelines

Guideline 1. 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.

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.

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 blocks of text, 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. There are strategies that make it easier to navigate and manipulate a marked up document. A compressed view of the document allows the author to both get a good sense of the overall structure and to navigate that structure more easily.

Checkpoints:

1.1 Use all applicable operating system and accessibility standards and conventions. [Priority 1]

• Guidelines for specific platforms include
  1. "IBM Guidelines for Writing Accessible Applications Using 100% Pure Java" [JAVA-ACCESS] R. Schwerdtfeger, IBM Special Needs Systems.
  2. "An ICE Rendezvous Mechanism for X Window System Clients" [ICE-RAP], W. Walker. A description of how to use the ICE and RAP protocols for X Window clients.
  3. "Information for Developers About Microsoft Active Accessibility" [MS-ACCESS] Microsoft Corporation.
  4. "The Inter-Client communication conventions manual" [ICCCM]. A protocol for communication between clients in the X Window system.
  5. "Lotus Notes accessibility guidelines" [NOTES-ACCESS] IBM Special Needs Systems.
  6. "Java accessibility guidelines and checklist" [JAVA-CHECKLIST] IBM Special Needs Systems.
  7. "The Java Tutorial. Trail: Creating a GUI with JFC/Swing" [JAVA-TUT]. An online tutorial that describes how to use the Swing Java Foundation Class to build an accessible User Interface.
  8. "Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines" [APPLE-HI] Apple Computer Inc.
  9. "The Microsoft Windows Guidelines for Accessible Software Design" [MS-SOFTWARE]. Warning! This is a "self-extracting archive", an application that will probably only run on MS-Windows systems.
• Guidelines for specific software types include
  1. "The Three-tions of Accessibility-Aware HTML Authoring Tools" [ACCESS-AWARE], J. Richards.
  2. "User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (Working Draft)" J. Gunderson, I. Jacobs eds. (This is a work in progress) [WAI-USERAGENT]
• General guidelines for producing accessible software include:
  1. "Accessibility for applications designers" [MS-ENABLE] Microsoft Corporation.
  2. "Application Software Design Guidelines" [TRACE-REF] compiled by G. Vanderheiden. A thorough reference work.
  3. "Designing for Accessibility" [SUN-DESIGN] Eric Bergman and Earl Johnson. This paper discusses specific disabilities including those related to hearing, vision, and cognitive function.
  4. "EITACC Desktop Software standards" [EITAAC] Electronic Information Technology Access Advisory (EITACC) Committee.
  5. "Requirements for Accessible Software Design" [ED-DEPT] US Department of Education, version 1.1 March 6, 1997.
  6. "Software Accessibility" [IBM-ACCESS] IBM Special Needs Systems
  7. "Towards Accessible Human-Computer Interaction" [SUN-HCI] Eric Bergman, Earl Johnson, Sun Microsytems 1995. A substantial paper, with a valuable print bibliography.
  8. "What is Accessible Software" [WHAT-IS] James W. Thatcher, Ph.D., IBM, 1997. This paper gives a short example-based introduction to the difference between software that is accessible, and software that can be used by some assistive technologies.
• User Interfaces are sometimes built as web content, and as such should follow the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT] (See also 3 Support accessible authoring practices )
• The following are common requirements for producing accessible software. This list does not necessarily cover all requirements for all platforms, and items may not be applicable to some software.:

  Following Standards

  • Draw text and objects using system conventions
  • Make mouse, keyboard, and API activation of events consistent
  • Provide a User Interface that is "familiar" (to system standards, or across platform)
  • Use system standard indirections wherever possible
  • Ensure all dialogs, subwindows, etc meet these requirements
  • Avoid blocking assistive technology functions (sticky/mouse keys, screenreader controls, etc) where possible

  Configurability

  • Allow users to create profiles
  • Allow control of timing, colors, sizes, input/output devices and media
  • Allow users to reshape the user interface - customize toolbars, keyboard commands, etc

  Input Device Independence

  • Provide Keyboard access to all functions
  • Document all keyboard bindings
  • Provide customizable keyboard shortcuts for common functions
  • Provide logical navigation order for the keyboard interface.
  • Avoid repetitive keying wherever possible
  • Provide mouse access to functions where possible

  Icons, Graphics, Sounds

  • Provide visual (text) equivalents for sound warnings
  • Allow sounds to be turned off
  • Provide text equivalents for images/icons
  • Use customizable (or removable) colors/patterns
  • Ensure high contrast is available (as default setting)
  • Provide text equivalents for all audio
  • Use icons that are resizeable or available in multiple sizes

  Layout

  • Do not rely on color alone for meaning. Use color for differentiation, in combination with accessible cues (text equivalents, natural language, etc)
  • Position related text labels and objects consistently, and in an obvious manner (labels before objects is recommended)
  • Group related controls
  • Ensure default window sizes fit in screen
  • Allow for window resizing (very small to very large)

  User Focus

  • Clearly identify the user focus (and expose it via API)
  • moving focus should not cause unexpected events
  • Allow user control of timing - delays, time-dependent response, etc
  • Allow for navigation between as well as within windows

1.2 Allow the author to change the editing view without changing the presentational markup defined for the document currently being edited. [Priority 1]

• In representing the source structure of a document mark elements with textual brackets rather than purely graphic representations. For example "</>" is regarded as a textual bracket, since it is made of character elements.
• Allow the user to create audio style sheets using a visual representation rather than an audio one (with accessible representation, of course).
• An authoring tool that offers a "rendered view" of a document, such as a browser preview mode, may provide an editing view whose presentation can be controlled independently of the rendered view.
• A "WYSIWYG" editor may allow an author to specify a local stylesheet, that will override the "published" style of the document.

1.3 Allow the author to display an editable equivalent for each element, object, and property that is available for editing. [Priority 1]

• Enable the author to view a document in its "source" mode.
• For a site management tool, allow the author to display a site map in text form (e.g., as a structured tree file).
• Allow the author to specify that filenames or alternative content are rendered in place of images or other multimedia content while editing.
• Include attributes / properties of elements in a view of the structure.
• Provide access to a list of properties via a "context menu" for each element.
• Graphically represented elements cannot be identified by assistive technologies that translate text to braille, speech, or large print, unless there is appropriate information available as text. For example, some HTML authoring tools display start and end tags as graphics.
• An authoring tool may offer several views of the same document.

1.4 Enable navigation and editing via the structure of the document. [Priority 1]

• Allow the author to navigate via an "outline" or "structure" of the document being edited. This is particularly important for people who are using a slow interface such as a small braille device, or speech output, or a single switch input device. It is equivalent to the ability provided by a mouse interface to move rapidly around the document.
• To minimally satisfy this checkpoint, allow navigation from element to element.

1.5 Enable editing of the structure of the document. [Priority 2]

• An authoring tool may offer a structured tree view of the document, allowing the author to move among, select and cut, copy or paste elements of the document.

Guideline 2. Generate standard markup

The first step towards producing accessible content is conformance with standards, which promotes interoperability.

Checkpoints:

2.1 Use applicable W3C Recommendations. [Priority 2]

• When creating document types, make full use of W3C Recommendations [W3C-RECS] (Specifications that have been approved by the W3C. These specifications have undergone review specifically to ensure that they do not compromise, and where possible they enhance, accessibility). For example when creating mathematical content for the Web use MathML rather than another markup language. Use applicable HTML structures.

2.2 Extensions to W3C Recommendations must not make content inaccessible. [Priority 1]

• New document types are constantly being developed, and in many cases offer improvements to the structure and utility of Web content. In implementing a new or extended document type it is important to ensure that a tool does not remove access to information that had been inherent in the base document type.

  An HTML example of a document type that contravenes this checkpoint is a FRAMESET used without NOFRAMES - it precludes access to the underlying information, whereas NOFRAMES provides a means to access the information contained within the FRAMESET.

  The same can apply to a reduced DTD. For example, producing a DTD that did not include the "alt" attribute for IMG, or effectively working to such a DTD by not implementing a means to include the attribute, compromises the accessibility of any included IMG elements.

Guideline 3. 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, these problems are likely to remain.

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 content or cause inaccessible content to be produced.

Checkpoints:

3.1 Implement all accessible authoring practices that have been defined for the markup language(s) supported by the tool. [Priority 1]

• General: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 [WAI-WEBCONTENT]
• Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 [WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS]
• HTML4: HTML4 Accessibility Improvements [HTML4-ACCESS]
• CSS2: CSS2 Accessibility Improvements [CSS2-ACCESS]

3.2 Produce content that conforms to the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT]. [Priority 1 for level-A conformance, Priority 2 for double-A conformance, Priority 3 for triple-A conformance]

• Use consistent document structures
• Include markup which supports alternatives for media-dependent elements or content
• Do not use structural markup for presentational effects, or presentation markup for known structures.

3.3 Ensure that templates to be inserted in the document conform to W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT]. [Priority 1 for level-A conformance, Priority 2 for double-A conformance, Priority 3 for triple-A conformance]

• Produce accessible representations for site maps generated by the authoring tool.
• Provide equivalent alternatives for all non-text content (images, audio, etc)
• Use consistent navigation schemata
• Ensure that event-handlers for scripts are device-independent
• Ensure that color schemes provide sufficient contrast for people or technology with poor color separation
• Ensure that the natural language of the template is identified
• Provide navigation bars
• Provide keyboard shortcuts for important links, etc.

3.4 Preserve all accessibility content during transformations and conversions. [Priority 1]

• When transforming a table to a list or list of lists, ensure that table headings are transformed into headings, and summary or caption information is retained as rendered content. (This transformation is not necessarily cleanly reversible)
• When importing images with associated descriptions to an HTML document make the descriptions available for use as longdesc, alt, or title
• When converting from a word-processor format to HTML ensure that headings and list items are transformed into appropriate headings of the appropriate level, and list items in the appropriate type of list (rather than as plain text with font formatting)
• Do not transform text into images - use style sheets for presentation control, or an XML application such as Scalable Vector Graphics that keeps the text as text. If this is not possible, ensure that the text that is converted is available as "alt-text" for the image.

Guideline 4. Ensure that no accessibility content is missing

Textual equivalents, including "alt-text", long descriptions, video captions, and transcripts are absolutely necessary for the accessibility of all images, applets, video, and audio files. However, the task of producing these equivalents is probably the most time-consuming accessibility recommendation made to the author.

The authoring tool can provide various mechanisms to assist the author in generating textual equivalents while ensuring that the author can determine whether the textual equivalent accurately reflects the information conveyed by the multimedia object.

Including professionally written descriptions for all multimedia files (e.g., clip-art) packaged with the tool will:

• Save users time and effort;
• Cause a significant number of professionally written descriptions to circulate on the Web;
• Provide users with convenient models to emulate when they write their own descriptions;
• Show authors the importance of description writing.

This will lead to an increase in the average quality of descriptions used.

Checkpoints:

4.1 Prompt the author to provide alternative content (e.g., captions, descriptive video). (Priority 1 for alternative content that is [Web-Content-Priority-1], Priority 2 for alternative content that is [Web-Content-Priority-2], Priority 3 for alternative content that is [Web-Content-Priority-3])

• Provide an author with the option of specifying alternative content, or electing to insert null alternative content for images, audio, video. Default to an accessibility error such as no "alt" attribute for images.
• Recognize collections of upper-case letters (in languages that have case) and prompt the author for an expansion, to be provided in markup.
• In Japanese, prompt the author for kana text that can be used as a ruby for unusual or complex kanji

4.2 Prompt the author for all missing structural information (e.g., language changes, table headers). (Priority 1 for structural information that is [Web-Content-Priority-1], Priority 2 for structural information that is [Web-Content-Priority-2], Priority 3 for structural information that is [Web-Content-Priority-3])

• Prompt the author for header information for tabular data.
• Where there is a change in the character set (or subset) used, prompt the author to identify whether there has been a change in language
• Prompt the author for header information for tabular data.
• Prompt the author (and allow them to specify a default suggestion) for the language of a document..

4.3 Allow the author to edit all alternative content and structural information. [Priority 1]

4.4 Provide pre-written alternative content for all multimedia files packaged with the authoring tool. [Priority 2]

• Use formats that allow for accessible annotation, such as PNG.
• Provide long descriptions, and associated text files with appropriate "alt-text" in clip-art collections.
• Provide video description files with prepackaged video.
• Provide text caption files for prepackaged audio, or video with audio track(s).
• See also checkpoint 2.4.4

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

• Allow authors to add objects and alternative content to a database maintained by the authoring tool. Whenever an object is used for that alternative content is provided, ask if the author would like to add the object and the alternative content to the database. Allow different alternative content to be associated with a single object.
• Allow authors to make keyword searches of a description database (to simplify the task of finding relevant images, sound files, etc.). A paper describing a method to create searchable databases for video and audio files is available (refer to [SEARCHABLE]).
• Suggest pre-written descriptions as default text whenever one of the associated files is inserted into the author's document.
• This checkpoint is prioritized as a level 3, meaning that in itself, it does not have a critical effect on an authoring tool's likelihood of producing accessible mark-up. However, several limited extensions to this alternative content mechanism (ACM) have the potential to simultaneously meet several higher priority checkpoints and dramatically improve the usability of an access aware authoring tool. In particular:
  1. The ACM should maintain a list of associations between object file names and authored responses to prompts for alternative content (as per checkpoint 2.3.1 [Priority 1]). The alternative content may take the form of short strings (i.e. "alt"-text) or pointers to descriptive files (i.e., "longdesc", transcripts, etc.). Multiple associations for the same object for different languages or contexts should also be handled.
  2. The ACM would offer the associated alternative content as a default whenever the appropriate associated object is selected for insertion. If no previous association is found, the field should be left empty (i.e., no purely rule-generated alternative content should be used). Note: the term "default" implies that the alternative content is offered for the author's approval. The term does not imply that the default alternative content is automatically placed without the author's approval. Such automatic placement may only occur when in situations where the function of the object is known with certainty, as per checkpoint 2.3.5 [Priority 1]. Such a situation might arise in the case of a "navigation bar builder" that places a navigation bar at the bottom of every page on a site. In this case, it would be appropriate to use the same "alt"-text automatically for every instance of a particular image (with the same target) on every page.
  3. The alternative content mechanism should be closely integrated with the pre-written alternative content provided for all packaged multimedia files, as per checkpoint 2.3.4 [Priority 2]. This would allow the alternative content to be automatically retrieved whenever the author selected one of the packaged objects for insertion. An important benefit of the system would be the ease of adding a keyword search capability that would allow efficient location of multimedia based on its alternative content.

4.6 Do not insert automatically generated (e.g., the filename) or place-holder (e.g., "image") equivalent text, except in cases where human-authored text has been written for an object whose function is known with certainty. [Priority 1]

• Items used throughout a website, such as graphical navigation bars, should have standard alternative content. However the author should be prompted to edit or approve this the first time it is used in a site, and when the destination of the links is changed by the author.
• If the author has not specified alternative text for an IMG, or that none is required, default to having no alt attribute, so that an accessibility problem will be noted (see also checkpoint 2.6.1)

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 the highest-priority accessible authoring practices are the most visible and easily initiated by the author. Highlight the most accessible solutions when presenting choices for the author. [Priority 2]

• If there is more than one option for the author, and one option is more accessible than another, place the more accessible option first and make it the default. For example, when requesting alternative content for an image, offer an unchecked option for empty alternative (i.e., alt="", implying the image has no real function) with the cursor positioned in the text entry for an "alt" value, rather than offering the filename as a default suggestion, with the null "alt" value selected.

5.2 Make generation of accessible content a naturally integrated part of the authoring process. [Priority 1]

• Ensure that accessible authoring practices can be easily accessed by the author in a natural, intuitive fashion
• Include considerations for accessibility - such as the "alt" and "longdesc" attributes of the IMG element - right below the "src" attribute in a dialogue box, not buried behind an "Advanced..." button.
• Allow efficient and fast access to accessibility-related settings with as few steps as possible needed to make any changes that will generate accessible content.
• Do not set accessibility features off to the side as some optional "module"; rather, make them a part of the core operation of the authoring tool.
• The "factory settings" default configuration for the authoring tool should favor accessible solutions "out of the box", for the benefit of newer users.
• A help page that describes how to make an image map should include adding alternative content for each AREA in the MAP as part of the process. Any examples of code should give either block content with text links, or AREA elements that all have relevant ALT attribute values.
• When a user creates a frameset, suggest the main content page and a navigation bar as the content for NOFRAMES.

Guideline 6. 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 may automatically identify inaccessible content, and enable its correction even when the markup itself is hidden from the author.

In supporting the creation of accessible Web content, authoring tools must take into account the differing authoring styles of their users. 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 that validity is an accessibility requirement, particularly for assistive technologies.

Checkpoints:

6.1 Check for and alert the author to accessibility problems. (Priority 1 for accessibility problems that are [Web-Content-Priority-1], Priority 2 for accessibility problems that are [Web-Content-Priority-2], Priority 3 for accessibility problems that are [Web-Content-Priority-3])

• Highlight problems detected when documents are opened, or when an editing or insertion action is completed.
• Alert authors to accessibility problems when saving.

6.2 Allow users to control both the nature and timing of accessibility alerts. [Priority 2]

• Allow users to choose different alert levels based on the priority of authoring accessibility recommendations.
• If interruptive warnings are used, provide a means for the author to quickly set the warning to non-obtrusive to avoid frustration.
• Include alerts for [Web-Content-Priority 1] checkpoints in the default configuration.
• Allow authors to control both the nature and timing of the correction process.

6.3 Assist authors in correcting accessibility problems. (Priority 1 for accessibility problems that are [Web-Content-Priority-1], Priority 2 for accessibility problems that are [Web-Content-Priority-2], Priority 3 for accessibility problems that are [Web-Content-Priority-3])

• Do this in a way that is consistent with the look and feel of the authoring tool.
• Provide context sensitive-help for accessibility errors. See also 7 Promote accessibility in help and documentation

6.4 When removing unrecognized markup, alert the author (according to a configurable schedule). [Priority 2]

• Provide a summary of all automated structural changes that may affect accessibility.
• Do not change the DTD without notifying the author.

6.5 Provide the author with a summary of the document accessibility status on a configurable schedule. [Priority 3]

6.6 Allow the author to perform tag transformations. [Priority 3]

For example, to transform visually formatted elements to structure elements, or tables to lists.

• Allow the user to define transformations for imported documents that have presentation, rather than structural, markup.
• Include pre-written transformations to rationalize multiple tables, and to transform (deprecated) presentation HTML into style sheets.

Guideline 7. 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:

7.1 Integrate accessible authoring practices in all applicable help topics. [Priority 1]

• Ensure that accessibility solutions are present in all help text descriptions of markup practices (e.g., IMG elements should appear with "alt-text" and a "longdesc" attribute wherever appropriate).
• Provide examples of all accessibility solutions in help text, including those of lower Web-Content-Priority.
• Link from help text to any automated correction utilities.
• Implement context-sensitive help for all special accessibility terms as well as tasks related to accessibility.
• Link those mechanisms used to identify accessibility problems (e.g., icons, outlining or other emphasis within the user interface) to help files.

7.2 Explain the accessible authoring practices supported by the authoring tool. [Priority 1]

• Include help documentation for all accessible authoring practices supported by the tool.

7.3 Do not use inaccessible markup in examples. [Priority 1]

7.4 Emphasize the universal benefit of accessible design. [Priority 3]

• In help text, when explaining the accessibility barriers of non-deprecated elements, emphasize appropriate solutions rather than explicitly discouraging the use of the element.
• Explain the importance of utilizing accessibility features generally and for specific instances.
• In help text, emphasize accessibility features that benefit multiple groups.

4 Terms and Definitions

Prompts and Alerts

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. For example, a user may wish to include multiple images without being prompted for alternative content, and then provide the alternative content in a batch process, or may wish to be reminded each time they add an image. If the prompting is done on a user configurable schedule they will be able to make that decision themselves. This technique allows a tool to suit the needs a wide range of authors.

Interruptive Alerts

Interruptive alerts are informative messages that interrupt the edit process for the user. For example, interruptive alerts are often presented when a user's action could cause a loss of data. Interruptive alerts allow problems to be brought to the user's attention immediately. However, users may resent the constant delays and forced actions. Many people prefer to finish expressing an idea before returning to edit its format.

Unintrusive Alerts

Unintrusive alerts are alerts such as icons, underlines, and gentle sounds that can be presented to the user without necessitating immediate action. for example, in some word processors misspelled text is highlighted without forcing the user to make immediate corrections. These alerts allow users to continue editing with the knowledge that problems will be easy to identify at a later time. However, users may become annoyed at the extra formatting or may choose to ignore the alerts altogether.

Prompts

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

Alerts

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

Markup Editing Tools and Functions

Authoring Tool

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Image Editor

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

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.

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.

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.

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. It also describes the substitution of textual equivalents for graphical or visually defined elements and objects, and the conversion from one element type to another within a document.

Documents, Elements, and Attributes

Document

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

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 has no closing tag or content.

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 stylesheet. In a database, properties of a particular element may include values of the entry, and acceptable data types for that element.

Attributes

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

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.

Accessibility Terms

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.

Accessible, Accessibility

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

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

All these terms are used in the context of inaccessibility as defined by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines [WAI-WEBCONTENT].

Accessibility Solution, Accessible Authoring Practice

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

Alternative Representation of Content

Alternative Textual Representations

Certain types of content may not be accessible to all users (e.g., images), so authoring tools must ensure that alternative textual representations ("Alt-text") of information is available to the user. Alternative text can come from element content (e.g., the OBJECT element) or attributes (e.g., "alt" or "title").

Description Link (D-link)

A description link, or D-Link, is an author-supplied link to additional information about a piece of content that might otherwise be difficult to access (image, applet, video, etc.).

Transcripts

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

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.

Inserting and Editing

Inserting an element

Inserting an element involves placing that element's markup within the markup of the file. This applies to all insertions, including, but not limited to, direct coding in a text editing mode, choosing an automated insertion from a pull-down menu or tool bar button, "drag-and-drop" style insertions, or "paste" operations.

Editing an element

Editing an element involves making changes to one or more of an element's attributes or properties. This applies to all editing, including, but not limited to, direct coding in a text editing mode, making changes to a property dialog or direct User Interface manipulation.

Selection, Focus, and Events

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.

Editing view

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

Rendered view

What is displayed by the authoring tool to the author as a means of simulating how a user of the document being edited will interact with the document currently being edited as a published document.

Selection

A selection is a set of elements identified for a particular operation. The user selection identifies a set of elements for certain types of user interaction (e.g., cut, copy, and paste operations). The user selection may be established by the user (e.g., by a pointing device or the keyboard) or via an accessibility Application Programmatic Interface (API). A view may have several selections, but only one user selection.

Current User Selection

When several views co-exist, each may have a user selection, but only one is active, called the current user selection. The selections may be rendered specially (e.g., visually highlighted).

Focus

The focus designates the active element (e.g., link, form control, element with associated scripts, etc.) in a view that will react when the user next interacts with the document.

5 Acknowledgments

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

If you have contributed to the AU guidelines and your name does not appear please contact the editors to add your name to the list.

6 References

[ACCESS-AWARE]

"The Three-tions of Accessibility-Aware HTML Authoring Tools", J. Richards. Available at:
http://www.utoronto.ca/atrc/rd/hm/3tions.htm

[APPLE-HI]

"Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines", Apple Computer Inc. Available at:

http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/mac/HIGuidelines/HIGuidelines-2.html

[APROMPT]

A-prompt tool is a freely available example tool developed by the Adaptive Technology Resource Center at the University of Toronto, and the TRACE center at the University of Wisconsin. The source code for the tool is also available: http://aprompt.snow.utoronto.ca

[CSS1]

"CSS, level 1 Recommendation", B. Bos, H. Wium Lie, eds. The CSS1 Recommendation is available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1

[CSS2]

"CSS, level 2 Recommendation", B. Bos, H. Wium Lie, C. Lilley, and I. Jacobs, eds. The CSS2 Recommendation is available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/

[CSS2-ACCESS]

"WAI Resources: CSS2 Accessibility Improvements", I. Jacobs and J. Brewer, eds. This document, that describes accessibility features in CSS2, is available at:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/CSS2-access

[ED-DEPT]

"Requirements for Accessible Software Design", US Department of Education, version 1.1 March 6, 1997. Available at:

http://ocfo.ed.gov/coninfo/clibrary/software.htm.

[EITAAC]

"EITACC Desktop Software standards", Electronic Information Technology Access Advisory (EITACC) Committee. Available at: trace.wisc.edu/docs/eitacc_desktop_software_standards/desktop_software_standards.htm

[HTML40]

"HTML 4.0 Recommendation", D. Raggett, A. Le Hors, and I. Jacobs, eds. The HTML 4.0 Recommendation is available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/

[HTML4-ACCESS]

"WAI Resources: HTML 4.0 Accessibility Improvements", I. Jacobs, J. Brewer, and D. Dardailler, eds. This document, that describes accessibility features in HTML 4.0, is available at:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/HTML4-access

[IBM-ACCESS]

"Software Accessibility" IBM Special Needs Systems. Available at:

http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/accesssoftware.html

[ICCCM]

"The Inter-Client communication conventions manual". A protocol for communication between clients in the X Window system. Available at:

http://ftp.x.org/pub/R6.3/xc/doc/specs/ICCCM/

[ICE-RAP]

"An ICE Rendezvous Mechanism for X Window System Clients", W. Walker. A description of how to use the ICE and RAP protocols for X Window clients. Available at:

http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/x_win_andice/x_andice.htm

[JAVA-ACCESS]

"IBM Guidelines for Writing Accessible Applications Using 100% Pure Java", R. Schwerdtfeger, IBM Special Needs Systems. Available at:

http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/snsjavag.htm

[JAVA-CHECKLIST]

"Java Accessibility Guidelines and Checklist" IBM Special Needs Systems. Available at:

http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/accessjava.html

[JAVA-TUT]

"The Java Tutorial. Trail: Creating a GUI with JFC/Swing". An online tutorial that describes how to use the Swing Java Foundation Class to build an accessible User Interface. Available at:

http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/uiswing/

[MS-ACCESS]

"Information for Developers About Microsoft Active Accessibility" Microsoft Corporation. Available at:

http://www.microsoft.com/enable/msaa/develop.htm

[MS-ENABLE]

"Accessibility for Applications Designers" Microsoft Corporation. Available at:

http://www.microsoft.com/enable/dev/apps.htm

[MS-SOFTWARE]

"The Microsoft Windows Guidelines for Accessible Software Design". Warning! This is a "self-extracting archive", an application that will probably only run on MS-Windows systems.

http://www.microsoft.com/enable/download/winapp23.exe

[NOTES-ACCESS]

"Lotus Notes Accessibility Guidelines" IBM Special Needs Systems. Available at:

http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/accessnotes.html.

[SEARCHABLE]

"A Comparison of Schemas for Dublin Core-based Video Metadata Representation", J Hunter. Available at: http://www.dstc.edu.au/RDU/staff/jane-hunter/mpeg7/contribution.htm

[SUN-DESIGN]

"Designing for Accessibility" Eric Bergman and Earl Johnson. This paper discusses specific disabilities including those related to hearing, vision, and cognitive function. Available at:

http://www.sun.com/tech/access/software.guides.html

[SUN-HCI]

"Towards Accessible Human-Computer Interaction" Eric Bergman, Earl Johnson, Sun Microsytems 1995. A substantial paper, with a valuable print bibliography. Available at:

http://www.sun.com/tech/access/updt.HCI.advance.html.

[TRACE-REF]

"Application Software Design Guidelines" compiled by G. Vanderheiden. A thorough reference work. Available at:

http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/software_guidelines/software.htm

[W3C-RECS]

"W3C Technical Reports and Publications" The latest versions of W3C Recomendations are available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR

[WAI-AUTOOLS]

"Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (Working Draft)", J. Treviranus, J. Richards, I. Jacobs, and C. McCathieNevile eds. The latest working draft of these guidelines is available at:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/WAI-AUTOOLS

[WAI-USERAGENT]

"User Agent Accessibility Guidelines", J. Gunderson and I. Jacobs, eds. These guidelines for designing accessible user agents are available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-USERAGENT

[WAI-WEBCONTENT]

"Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0", W. Chisholm, G. Vanderheiden, and I. Jacobs, eds. These guidelines for designing accessible documents are available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT

[WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS]

"Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines", W. Chisholm, G. Vanderheiden, and I. Jacobs, eds. These techniques for designing accessible documents are available at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS/

[Web-Content-Priority]

Priorities defined by [WAI-WEBCONTENT].

[WHAT-IS]

"What is Accessible Software" James W. Thatcher, Ph.D., IBM, 1997. This paper gives a short example-based introduction to the difference between software that is accessible, and software that can be used by some assistive technologies. Available at

http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/software.html.