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

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

From: Alistair Garrison <alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 10:37:54 +0100
To: Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8B6E6058-514A-49D3-8851-03B012384796@gmail.com>
Hi Leonie, 

From http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/#conformance-claims - "Conformance is defined only for Web pages. However, a conformance claim may be made to cover one page, a series of pages, or multiple related Web pages."

Where they say "for Web Pages" I think they meant to say "for full Web Pages" - referencing "Conformance (and conformance level) is for full Web page(s) only, and cannot be achieved if part of a Web page is excluded." from the same page.

Hope this clarifies things...

All the best 

Alistair

On 20 Jan 2012, at 10:14, Léonie Watson wrote:

> 	If I understand correctly, WCAG conformance relates to a single page, not to an entire website. I'd be interested in people's thoughts on how this might (or might not) influence our thinking about an error margin?
> 
> 
> Léonie.
> 
> -- 
> Nomensa - humanising technology
> 
> Léonie Watson, Director of Accessibility & Web Development
> tel: +44 (0)117 929 7333
> mob: +44 (0)792 116 8551
> twitter: @we_are_Nomensa @LeonieWatson
> 
> Nomensa Email Disclaimer: http://www.nomensa.com/email-disclaimer
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Detlev Fischer [mailto:fischer@dias.de] 
> Sent: 19 January 2012 21:58
> To: public-wai-evaltf@w3.org
> Subject: Re: 100% conformance for the pages sampled...
> 
> Let's stop here and consider the implications.
> 
> Here and then, people in the EVAL TF have agreed that the 100% conformant site does not really exist 'out there'. Aren't we holding the bone a wee bit too high? I wonder what that will mean for the practical acceptance of the methodology. Will it come to be derided as academic, as impossibly demanding? Who then is the customer of a (sorry, chap) refused seal of conformance who bows to gracefully accept the list of flaws to rectify? Just wondering...it just strikes me as slightly surreal...
> 
> Detlev
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting RichardWarren <richard.warren@userite.com>:
> 
>> Dear Alistair and All,
>> 
>> Having just spent a fortune getting my son's car through its MOT I 
>> have to agree with Alistair 100%. Our task is to establish a 
>> methodology for evaluating website accessibility. If the evaluation 
>> identifies that the site fully meets the guidelines then a conformance 
>> claim can be made to that effect. Everyone will know exactly what that 
>> means.
>> 
>> If the site "almost" meets the guidelines then perhaps some other form 
>> of "compliance statement" can be made - BUT that is not our current 
>> problem. Maybe, once we have finished our methodology, we can 
>> recommend a new task force to look at variance in conformance claims 
>> <grin>.
>> 
>> 
>> Regards
>> Richard
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Alistair Garrison
>> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 9:02 PM
>> 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.
>> 
>> Alistair
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Detlev Fischer PhD
> DIAS GmbH - Daten, Informationssysteme und Analysen im Sozialen
> Geschäftsführung: Thomas Lilienthal, Michael Zapp
> 
> Telefon: +49-40-43 18 75-25
> Mobile: +49-157 7-170 73 84
> Fax: +49-40-43 18 75-19
> E-Mail: fischer@dias.de
> 
> Anschrift: Schulterblatt 36, D-20357 Hamburg Amtsgericht Hamburg HRB 58 167
> Geschäftsführer: Thomas Lilienthal, Michael Zapp
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 09:38:28 GMT

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