W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2003

Re: Fwd: EOWG discussion questions for WCAG 2.0 Working Draft

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:22:03 -0700
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030814091450.011d7470@pop3.gorge.net>
To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

At 10:30 AM 8/14/2003 -0400, Judy Brewer wrote:
>5. Does the conformance model appear to be:
>- clearly defined and implementable?

The fine line between EO advice about clarity, etc. and the WG role in 
deciding what the conformance model should be is IMO being breached by 
discussions about the conformance model itself, rather than about its 
clarity and such.

When I was in WG for WCAG it was clear that the change from P1 levels to 
something else was on the agenda and that WHATEVER was decided on would 
call for exactly the same kinds of arguments that are going on now because 
of these changes.

I really believe that we should leave that up to their WG. It is both a can 
of worms and a rat hole. I propose that we deal exclusively with the 
presentation of the conformance model and not with its content, else we be 
drawn down the same rat hole.

--
Love.

It's Bad Luck to be Superstitious! 
Received on Thursday, 14 August 2003 12:24:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:36 GMT