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

Use of concepts and text from UWEM 1.2 in WCAG 2.0 Methodology

From: Alistair Garrison <alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:33:42 +0100
Message-Id: <B633B21A-A0B5-4E36-8CD4-D6A24EB095F6@gmail.com>
To: Eric Velleman <evelleman@bartimeus.nl>, Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Dear Eric, All, 

Recently, I read the Unified Web Evaluation Methodology (UWEM 1.2 Core) [http://www.wabcluster.org/uwem1_2/UWEM_1_2_CORE.pdf] produced by the Web Accessibility Benchmarking Cluster (WABCluster).  Eric, I think, you were one of the authors?  I'm listed as a contributor, although that was UWEM 1.0...

Whilst I was reading the document I noticed that a number of concepts (error margin, barriers, sampling techniques...) from this document, and even chunks of text from this document, appear (sometimes verbatim) in the Methodology we are trying to produce. 

Although, a little surprised at this, I have maybe missed a telecon discussion / email where the Eval TF group agreed to base its WCAG 2.0 Methodology on the UWEM 1.2? I suppose it could save us a lot of time as certain concepts we are now discussing have already been crystallised in the UWEM 1.2 - there's even a definition for 'barrier'...

In any case, and just to be sure, if we (Eval TF) are to lift and use concepts / text from UWEM 1.2 there are a number of things we must incorporate into our document to reflect the wishes of the original copyright notice. According to the UWEM 1.2 Document License we must include the following in our document: 

1) A link or URL to the original document.
2) The pre-existing copyright notice of the original author, or if it doesn't exist, a notice (hypertext is preferred, but a textual representation is permitted) of the form: "Copyright  2005 European Commission, and WAB Cluster members. All Rights Reserved."
3) The STATUS of the document.

That is, unless there was something other discussed or the copyright for the original UWEM 1.2 document has somehow been re-assigned... 

Again, I apologise if this has already been attended to and for having missed a number of calls...

All the best 

Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 09:34:12 UTC

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