

RE: HTML Techniques: General comments on July draft

From: Ben Caldwell <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 14:46:27 -0500
Message-Id: <200407291946.i6TJkYYW006217@jalopy.cae.wisc.edu>

John wrote:


For example, the term METADATA is a level 2 heading. The items under it are identified first by number rather than by element or attribute name, etc. Thus I can bring up JAWS’ headings list (Ins+F6) and press M+<enter> to jump straight to the METADATA section, but pressing T doesn’t take me to the sub-section about the TITLE element (which is a level 3 heading that begins with the number 1.2, so I’d have to remember to press “1” to get there the headings list). pressing “T” does take me to the section called Task, and to the section headed “This technique relates to…”.  But the document contains a great many sections with these headings—one of each for every technique in the document! 

<end snip>

[BBC] My bad. Will modify the XSLT so that these headings are demoted to paragraph status. 

Numbering also comes into this. For example, a section called Navigational Supports follows the Metadata section; both are tagged as <h2>.  The items listed under the Navigational Supports heading are tagged as <h3> and numbered from 2.1 forward. But the Metadata and Navigational Supports headings are not numbered, so it’s a surprise to hear those numbers beginning with 2.x…

[BBC] Good catch. This is another XSLT issue I need to fix. The numbers are getting applied in the table of contents, but not when rendered later in the document.

Numbering is going to be a tricky issue. Ideally, we would have a numbering system that allows us to easily reference a specific technique in a guidelines documents so that it's easy to know which techniques draft is being referenced when the links are taken out of context (ex. when cross referenced form gateway or other techniques documents).

We also have an open issue related to numbering items at the success criterion level. Is there a way to more easily reference the fifth level 2 success criterion in guideline 3.2? Current drafts use "3.2 L2 SC5," which can be confusing. However, including the entire success criterion is often impractical when generating the drafts as well.


Received on Thursday, 29 July 2004 15:49:03 UTC
