W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 2003

RE: Proposed changes to draft of the ATAG References to WCAG note

From: Karen Mardahl <karen@mardahl.dk>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 02:38:49 +0100
To: "'List (WAI-AUWG)'" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000401c3b7ab$e3932db0$0201a8c0@karenm>

Hi

Just a clarification here. Were we supposed to discuss this or was it just
supposed to be posted? I don't see any discussion, so I'll just say that it
is trimmed nicely as compared to what is currently at
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2003/WD-ATAG20-20030722/wcagrefs

I speculated whether it could just be included in ATAG 2.0 and/or the TECHS
2.0 document. There is the bit at the beginning that states 

<snip>
The Authoring Tools Accessibility Guidelines v2.0 (ATAG 2.0) includes five
"Relative Priority Checkpoints":
<list of 5 items snipped out>
These checkpoints refer to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)
as the "benchmark" for what constitues accessible content. However, it is
important to notice that the ATAG 2.0 guidelines document, does not specify
a version of WCAG with which to conform. Instead, it is left up to the
evaluator to choose a whichever version of WCAG (listed in this document) is
appropriate for their circumstances. This should help developers conform to
ATAG 2.0, even if they have been working towards WCAG version 1.0. In
addition, if future versions of WCAG are released, it will necessitate a new
version of this note, rather than a new version of ATAG.
<snip>

That would mean this note does need to exist as an independent document.
Couldn't it be trimmed even more to say that 2.0 

"...includes checkpoints with "Relative Priority". These checkpoints refer
to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) as the "benchmark" for
what constitutes accessible content. Note, however, that the ATAG 2.0
guidelines do not specify which WCAG version to follow. The evaluator can
choose whichever version of WCAG, as explained below, is appropriate for
their circumstances. This should enable developers to conform to ATAG 2.0,
even if they have been working toward WCAG version 1.0..."

Then explain how in 1.0 they have priorities and in 2.0, levels. Everything
that comes after "...rather than a new version of ATAG." in Jan's original
posting.

This could then be included in the ATAG 2.0 document itself, without being a
separate note. Since [WCAG-REFS] is a reference item, the WCAG-REFS could
just refer to the line in ATAG 2.0 where this text starts. Couldn't it?

Just my .14 kroners worth!

regards, Karen Mardahl



-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Jan Richards
Sent: 7. november 2003 18:32
To: List (WAI-AUWG)
Subject: Proposed changes to draft of the ATAG References to WCAG note


Hi,

This document has been updated with the most recent WCAG 2.0 conformance
scheme. A number of editorial improvements have also been made.

Cheers,
Jan

-- 
Jan Richards, User Interface Design Specialist
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC), University of Toronto

  Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
  Web:   http://ultrajuan.ic.utoronto.ca/jan/richards.html
  Phone: 416-946-7060
  Fax:   416-971-2896


Resolving ATAG 2.0 References to WCAG
Working Draft [Day Month Year]
This version: 
??? 
Latest version: 
??? 
Previous version: 
??? 
<snip>
Received on Sunday, 30 November 2003 20:38:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:48 UTC