DCMI Accessibility Special Interest Group
DCMI Accessibility Special Interest Group
| Row title | Details |
|---|---|
| Title: | DCMI Accessibility Special Interest Group |
| Chair: | Liddy Nevile, [email protected] |
| Status: | This special interest group is currently active. |
| Established: | 2001-10-25 |
|
Charter: (Draft) |
To provide a forum to: * to consider the role of advice to DCMI about the
accessibility of its products - website, tools and
recommendations - and report on a strategy for ensuring
that DC recommendatiojs and information are accessible in
the future |
Jump to: Open Issues | Forums | Background | History | Related Work | Resources
Open Issues [top]
A preliminary set of issues have been developed. more are invited.
Is accessibility a resource discovery issue?
What is the relationship between accessibility (W3C's ERL?) descriptions and DC descriptions?
Is it sensible to embed one in the other?
Could one provide, as part of DC RELATION, information about the relationship between equivalent resources?
Should ERL schemata be recommended?
Information that may be of use in the discovery process
Resource Description
We want to convey a statement that there are appropriate multiple versions of content, within the same resource, so that everyone who has the resource will have access to a suitable transformation of it.
Equivalence - a special notion
Accessibility communities consider that some content can be available in alternative formats but some is more than this, it is equivalent, i.e. for some users the alternative will be not merely interpretation of the original but suitable to be used instead and simultaneously - see definitions at http://www.w3c.org/WAI
What DC elements are relevant
Preliminary discussion points to:
RIGHTS - access rightsbut is it the right sort of access?
TYPE - not useful here
- RELATION - is format of (expects changes in format but not in content) and is version of (expects changes in content)
FORMAT - used to convey mime type, size, and could be relevant t accessibility.
Does accessibility need a new element ?
only if essential
is it proposed here only for political reasons? should this be tolerated?
or is there a serious case because the information doesn't dumb-down to readable form (Note: an associated text string could be very long), and
- accessibility metadata is already able to be used to drive user access applications and needs to be in a special place?
In general,
gateways need to be accessible and
they can expose accessibility or otherwise of the resources they point to, and
the utility of gateways will improve if they carry accessibility information.
Forums [top]
Decisions are made by obtaining a consensus from a broad range of individuals and organizations. Listed here are some of the open fora where discussions take place:
Special Interest Group mailing list: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/dc-accessibility.html
There have been several activities of relevance to this Interest Group. (If others know of relevant activities, please let us know!)
Original meeting of interested members at DC 2001, Tokyo, October 2001.
Meeting of W3C WAI Interest Group and IMS Accessibility Working Group, Melbourne, November 2001.
- Meeting of W3C Authoring Tools WG and IMS Accessibility WG associated with W3C Technical Plenary, Nice, February 2002.
- Meeting at WWW 2002 Accessibility Workshop, Waikiki, May 2002.
- EARL meeting in Bristol, June 24-26, 2002. Meeting Report.
and coming up:
- Workshop (?) at DC 2002 Conference, Florence, October 2002.
Background [top]
Meeting of interested members at DC 2001, Tokyo, October 2001
Information on discussions and decisions that were used to support the creation of this special interest group.
Members of the Dublin Core™ Community who met in Tokyo at DC2001 Workshop considered the need for DCMI to demonstrate its concern for accessibility of web content by exemplifying good accessibility practices and providing a context for others who also take time to make their content accessible. The following image shows the process whereby a web resource can be tested for accessibility, and how ERL (the W3C Evaluation and Repair Language) might be used to capture the semantics of such a report.
History [top]
Date constituted: 2001-10-25, At the 9th Dublin Core™ Workshop in Tokyo a small group met to consider interest in forming a special interest group relating to issues concerning web content accessibility.
Related Work [top]
Links to groups, reports, software, projects, etc. that would be of interest to the participants of this special interest group.
W3C/WAI: http://www.w3c.org/WAI/, developing accessibility standards, tests, and ERL, etc.
IEEE/LOM (IMS: http://www.imsproject.org/), working on metadata about resources and learners and accessibility
NCAM: http://ncam.wgbh.org/, accessibility of all media.
Resources [top]
Information, standards and reports that were used to support the decisions and discussions in this special interest group.