W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 2011

RE: Re: Conformance use-cases

From: Richards, Jan <jrichards@ocad.ca>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:28:47 +0000
To: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0B1EB1C972BCB740B522ACBCD5F48DEB0399945C@ocadmail-maildb.ocad.ca>
Hi Alastair,

VPATs are a bit like conformance claims for Section 508. For each criterion the claimant can answer "Supports", "Supports with Exceptions" or "Does not support" and can then provide explanation. I think this is valuable because it enables full disclosure even when the software has not met all the criteria. If we maintain that Level A must be reached to make an ATAG 2.0 claim, we're discouraging claimants from this type of full, honest disclosure.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com]
> Sent: November 11, 2011 4:31 AM
> To: Richards, Jan
> Cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Re: Conformance use-cases
> Hi Jan,
> Still looking good. One hopefully quick question:
> It seems odd to be able to claim "Full" Conformance at "No level".
> I have to admit I'm not very familiar with VPATs (I read into it about
> 6/7 years ago, but haven't come across them since). I had a quick look
> again
> (http://www.itic.org/index.php?src=gendocs&ref=vpat&category=resources
> and searching for: vpat "no-level") but didn't see any reference to
> that concept.
> Could you point me to somewhere or outline what no-level is aimed at
> doing?
> Kind regards,
> -Alastair
Received on Friday, 11 November 2011 14:29:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:40:01 UTC