W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-evaltf@w3.org > January 2012

RE: Discussion 5.5

From: Boland Jr, Frederick E. <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:46:09 -0500
To: Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C4930905E6E8E5@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov>
According to some references I recently accessed, criticality implies that the evaluation cannot continue until the problem has been resolved, whereas non-criticality implies that the evaluation may proceed with the problem noted.

A definition of "error" (from 
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/error?s=t
) "a deviation from accuracy or correctness"
-which would seem to apply to "barrier" as well?

A definition of "barrier" (from
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/barrier?s=t
) "anything built or serving to bar passage"
-which would seem to imply criticality as mentioned previously


----- 

In many cases, distinguishing between critical and non-critical is easy. 
A keyboard trap or a lightbox dialogue that pops up without screen 
reader users becoming aware of it is a critical violation. A graphical 
navigation element without alt text is one as well. But a few missing 
paragraphs or list tags in editorial content are probably non-critical. 
However, there will be a grey area where the distinction is not so easy. 
But that, in my view, should not lead to the conclusion that the 
distinction cannot or must not be made.

Not sure about terms, though. Is 'error' a good term for non-critical 
violations and 'barrier' a good term for critical violations?

Detlev
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 19:48:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:52:13 GMT