re: Bug#1009 "QA-related comments": Proposed Response

Tim,

I added proposals for short sections on "extensions" and "deprecated 
requirements" at the end.

-----------

The following were APPROVED at today's meeting:

(1) Change wording of line:
FROM
A rationale for the checkpoint. (Normative)
TO
A rationale for the checkpoint. (Informative)

(2) Move section 3 material above Guidelines.

(3) Add the following line to the conformance scheme:
Note: Conforming to a higher level (e.g. Double-"A") automatically
entails conformance to a lower level (e.g. Single-"A") as well.

-----------

The following is PENDING:

(4) Replacing the conformance scheme figure with:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JanMar/att-0084/conformance.png

-----------

The following are PROPOSALS for group comment (JR's action items):

(5) Add new section to the conformance scheme:

Extensions:
ATAG 2.0 does not limit the creative development of authoring tool 
functionality. A conforming authoring tool may have any range of 
features as long as all of the features have been implemented with 
accessible authoring interfaces and the required accessibility-related 
functionality is present.

(6) Add new section to the conformance scheme:

Deprecated Requirements:
Some functionality is required to conform to ATAG 1.0, but not to ATAG 
2.0. The only truly deprecated requirements in ATAG 2.0 are those 
inherited by changes between WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 (currently still a 
draft). For these changes see [WCAG deprecated requirements list?].

-----------

Cheers,
Jan

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

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

Received on Monday, 4 April 2005 21:55:45 UTC