W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > December 2008

Re: [Fwd: Re: Group common failures as well as (good) techniques]

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:46:50 +0100
Message-ID: <4935C8EA.20803@w3.org>
To: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
CC: ERT WG <public-wai-ert@w3.org>

Hi Johannes,

Yes, it did come up during the f2f - thanks for reminding us of it!

Thank you also for considering the input of ERT WG on your response to 
this comment that you have submitted.

My reading is that WCAG WG does plan to address this issue in the future 
updates of the Techniques documents, but they may not do it just now. I 
could live with this compromise rather than delay the publication.

I propose that this is discussed during tomorrow's call (which I will 
not be able to attend) as it is time-sensitive.

Best,
   Shadi


Johannes Koch wrote:
> 
> I think this issue came up during the last face-to-face meeting. And so 
> I filed a comment.
> 
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Re: Group common failures as well as (good) techniques
> Datum: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 14:51:00 -0800
> Von: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
> An: johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de
> CC: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
> Referenzen: <20081105095921.4E9A1C6DB5@barney.w3.org>
> 
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 1:59 AM, WCAG 2.0 Comment Form <nobody@w3.org> 
> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Name: Johannes Koch
>> Email: johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de
>> Affiliation: Fraunhofer FIT
>> Document: TD
>> Item Number: (none selected)
>> Part of Item: Description
>> Comment Type: general comment
>> Summary of Issue: Group common failures as well as (good) techniques
>> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
>> I wondered why the common failures in the techniques document are not
>> grouped as the (good) techniques are. They could be FG for general 
>> failures,
>> FH for HTML/XHTML failures, etc.
>>
>> Proposed Change:
>> Maybe rename the failures, or, at least, group them according to
>> technology.
>>
>> ================================
>  Response from the Working Group
> ================================
> 
> The working group felt it was important to raise the visibility of all
> failures.  In particular, authors need to be aware of general failures as
> well as failures specific to the technology they are using. So all failures
> are listed together.
> 
> However, we will consider including information that more clearly 
> associates
> failures with the technologies they relate to in future versions of the
> Techniques document.
> 
> Could you let us know by Monday, December 8 whether you are satisfied with
> our resolution? If that date is not possible, please reply to this message
> indicating when you will be able to respond.
> 
> If we do not hear from you by Monday, December 8, we will assume that
> you are satisfied with the responses to your comments.
> 
> Thanks again for the interest that you have taken in these guidelines.
> 
> Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
> Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
> Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact
> 
> 
> On behalf of the WCAG Working Group
> 
> 

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ |
   WAI International Program Office Activity Lead   |
  W3C Evaluation & Repair Tools Working Group Chair |
Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2008 23:47:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 December 2008 23:47:28 GMT