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

RE: 100% conformance for the pages sampled...

From: Vivienne CONWAY <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:09:33 +0800
To: Alistair Garrison <alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com>, Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8AFA77741B11DB47B24131F1E38227A9B4B3DA876F@XCHG-MS1.ads.ecu.edu.au>
Hi Alistair
I couldn't agree more.  As I mentioned in the teleconference call, I think we point out the problems, give the website owners time to fix them, and then make sure they have been fixed 100% on the representative sample (and a few extra random pages to make sure they haven't just fixed the sample), and then advise a conformance level.


Vivienne L. Conway, B.IT(Hons), MACS CT
PhD Candidate & Sessional Lecturer, Edith Cowan University, Perth, W.A.
Director, Web Key IT Pty Ltd.
Mob: 0415 383 673

This email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify me immediately by return email or telephone and destroy the original message.
From: Alistair Garrison [alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 20 January 2012 6:02 AM
To: Eval TF
Subject: 100% conformance for the pages sampled...

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.


This e-mail is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose or use the information contained within. If you have received it in error please return it to the sender via reply e-mail and delete any record of it from your system. The information contained within is not the opinion of Edith Cowan University in general and the University accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information provided.

Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 07:11:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:19 UTC