W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2006

follow up on myth of meeting guidelines & not getting accessibility myth

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 11:56:13 -0500
Message-ID: <44578F2D.8010804@w3.org>
To: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

EOWG,

Last week on the list and at the EOWG teleconference we discussed a bit about the myth that one could design a site that meets WCAG and is still not accessible.[1]

I realized after the call that I made a mistake in the premise of part of the discussion: that is, considering just Priority 1 and 2, and not Priority 3. We *know* that a site that meets P1 & P2 could still have accessibility issues, because we know there are accessibility issues in P3, of course. (duh!<grin>)

The real question that we need to address in order to call this myth a full myth is: are there any accessibility issues that WCAG doesn't cover at any priority/level. I'm interested in the answer for WCAG 1.0, in order to know if the basis for this myth was all misunderstanding, or if there is a little something to it. Also note that is question is particularly relevant for WCAG 2.0 right now -- that is, if there is anything missing, there's time to add it.

All for now...

Best,
~ Shawn

[1] For links to agenda questions, e-mail discussion, and teleconference minutes, see the "References" section of the Requirements and Changelog document at:
	http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/changelogs/cl-role.html#refs
Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2006 16:56:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:42 GMT