W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag-teamc@w3.org > September 2005

RE: some questions on Guide Document Template

From: Wendy Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:01:17 -0400
Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050914164940.022c6208@localhost>
To: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "'Tim Boland'" <frederick.boland@nist.gov>, <public-wcag-teamc@w3.org>
At 04:04 PM 9/14/2005, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>3 - Wendy- can you respond on related resources?  I think there may be some
>W3 guidance on what we list as resources but I don't know.

I think Michael's response clarifies this nicely:
<quote>This should be any resource that is useful for people to understand 
benefits of the success criterion or ways to meet its requirements. There 
is no need to include our techniques because they are provided elsewhere in 
the guide. External (non-W3C) information that is relevant should be 
provided here. "Background information" here might be links to external 
sites that provide details, even if some of that information was summarized 
in the section above.</quote>

The only W3C issues that I can forsee are:

1. linking to bibliography entries rather than creating in-line links to 
external resources. main reason is to provide more information about the 
resource (when it was referenced, location of most current draft, etc.)

Example 1: a link to bibliography entry:
"The term specification is used as defined in ISO Guide 2-4 [ISO-GUIDE]  as 
meaning..."
which links to the bibliography reference in the appendix:
ISO-GUIDE
     ISO/IEC Guide 2:2004 Standardization and related activities - General 
vocabulary. (See 
http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=39976 
for the latest version.)
Example 2: an in-line link to an external resource
"The term specification is used as defined in <a 
href="http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=39976">ISO 
Guide 2-4</a>  as meaning..."

2. clearly differentiating between normative and informative 
references.  Since "related references" are in informative documents, they 
are informative references so we won't have that issue at this level (but 
perhaps something to consider at Guideline/SC level). ala SpecGL [1]

Hope this helps,
--wendy

[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-qaframe-spec-20050817/#reference> 
Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2005 21:01:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:47 GMT