W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 2006

20 March 2006 call - new wording for B.2.4 and B.1.1

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:21:25 -0500
Message-ID: <441F2AE5.4080407@utoronto.ca>
To: "List (WAI-AUWG)" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>

Meeting call:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2006JanMar/0037.html

Participants:
Greg
Jutta
Jan

Regrets:
Barry
Tim
Roberto


Since we did not have a quorum we spent the time fine-tuning the work 
that Greg sent today (I don't have a URL since it is still in "W3 
mailing list purgatory" as I write).

The NEW wording the call proposes for checkpoint B.2.4 is:

B.2.4 Make it easy for authors to ensure that alternative equivalents 
for non-text objects are accurate and fit the context. [Priority 1]

Success Criteria:
1. All equivalent alternatives must be human authored (e.g. by the 
current author, by image library editor, etc.).
2. The tool must provide a perceivable view of the proposed equivalent 
alternatives and the author must be able to accept, change, or reject 
equivalent alternatives.


With regard to Jan's piece on B.1.1 
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2006JanMar/0036.html), 
the call thought the new checkpoint wording (did not discuss the 
technique wording) was ok except for this change is proposed for the 
rationale:

Within ATAG 2.0, *accessible content* means content that conforms to
WCAG. Content types that cannot be used to produce "accessible content"
are therefore ineligible for ATAG 2.0 conformance claims.


Also, the F2F meeting was discussed. Jutta is leaning towards NIST 
hosting in Gaithersburg, MD, USA at the start of the week (April 24,25) 
but Jan will be contacting Tim for more information.


Cheers,
Jan
Received on Monday, 20 March 2006 22:22:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 September 2008 15:53:06 GMT