W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2004

start on my action item from Mar 22 AUWG telecon

From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 15:21:12 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Attached is a start on my action item from Mar 22 AUWG telecon (to take 
priority 1 checkpoints
from the QA Spec Guidelines and rate the latest ATAG2.0 WD against these 
checkpoints.  The opinions are mine alone, and in going through the 
exercise more questions were raised in my mind than answers.   Anyway, 
comments welcome.

It seems to me that the Techniques may be more than "informative" from a 
testing point of view,
since they are providing specific guidance on satisfying normative 
requirements in the Guidelines, so it may be difficult to separate the 
guidance from actually testing the requirements of the Guidelines in a 
testing environment.

For Guideline 4 Techniques, it would be great if the techniques could be 
tied to the four types of authoring functionality in 1.1 of Guidelines 
(good and bad example for each); this is alluded to in the "3 AXES" text 
near the end of the Techniques document.   Is the "tool type" mentioned in
"breakdown by tool type" a reference to the four types?  For the 
screenshots, would one need to get permission to use them?  Are we 
promoting one product/technology over another if we use them?  Would we 
need a disclaimer?

Thanks and best wishes, Tim Boland NIST

Received on Thursday, 1 April 2004 15:21:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:49 UTC