Hi Greg,
I fully agree. If you see any tests that might be missing this, please let Jeanne or I know.
Cheers,
Jan
From: Greg Pisocky [mailto:gpisocky@adobe.com]
Sent: October-01-12 3:44 PM
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Subject: Re: Towards a description of ATAG 2.0's approach to testing
The issue of producing accessible content is also something ATAG 2.0 addresses which should also be addressed in the testing. The application may be accessible, but the output or one of its many outputs may be inaccessible or highly inaccessible. If you use tools x which produces content in formats A, B, and C be aware that A and B are not terribly accessible and should be avoided in favor of C.
Greg
[Description: C:\Users\gpisocky\Downloads\Non Adobe\SnagIt\Adobe Brand Center\eMail Signature\Adobe_Corporate_Email_Signature_and_Instructions\adobe_logo_web.png]
Greg Pisocky
Sr. Business Development Mgr.
Adobe Accessibility
571.765.5410 (tel)
703.678.3541 (cell)
gpisocky@adobe.com<mailto:gpisocky@adobe.com>
7930 Jones Branch Dr.
McLean, VA 22102
www.adobe.com<http://www.adobe.com>
Adobe's Accessibility Resource Center | www.adobe.com/accessibility<http://www.adobe.com/accessibility>
Product Compliance Info | http://www.adobe.com/accessibility/products/compliance/
