- From: Alistair Garrison <alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 22:02:21 +0100
- To: Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Dear All, If I understood correctly from this afternoon's EVAL TF telecon - there was a suggestion that we should (at a minimum) require the representative sample pages to be in 100% conformance with WCAG 2.0 (at the chosen level) in order to say the site conforms (at that level). If this was the case, I strongly agree with it (meant to write it in the IRC at the time). In addition, I noted from some a worry about telling a website owner (a client, etc) that their website doesn't conform - especially when they might have tried hard to do so. To my mind, worries of this kind should not deter us from asking for nothing less than 100% conformance (on any given sample). The person that does the MOT on my car has absolutely no worries about telling me about any failures, but possibly that's because everyone doing MOTs requires 100% conformance from a car for a pass. Surely, we want people to try their absolute best to conform 100%. We must encourage them to shoot for the stars (100% conformance) - some, of course, will initially only hit the moon, but they will at least know what is expected from them... Let's not, however, start to congratulate people for simply getting off the ground - that time must have passed long, long, long ago. Anyway, look forward to seeing you all on the list. Alistair
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 21:02:56 UTC