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

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

From: Léonie Watson <lwatson@nomensa.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:59:21 +0000
To: Alistair Garrison <alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com>, Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D4219A0ECCAE794C9ED7DC6F5A4C0CD537B3B02F16@jupiter.intranet.nomensa.com>
    Thanks Alastair, it does. Although it's started me thinking more about this. Given that WCAG acknowledges that Level AAA is not possible with all technologies, we could end up with a sample that is partly Level AA compliant and partly Level AAA compliant.

    I'm thinking out loud here as much as anything, but would we therefore consider the sample to be 100% Level AA compliant with additional achievements, Level AAA compliant with exceptions, or part Level AA and part Level AAA as applicable?


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



________________________________
From: Alistair Garrison [mailto:alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com]
Sent: 20 January 2012 09:38
To: Eval TF
Subject: Re: 100% conformance for the pages sampled...

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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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 11:59:47 GMT

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