[w3c-wai-eo] <none>

I just read this comment on WCAG 2.0. 
 It seems realistic.  People do not 
implement to W3C standards.  They 
implement to law and policy.  The WCAG 
is the template for law and policy. 
 We may not like it, but people need 
to interpret WCAG to their own 
technology and political 
configuration.  This can't be enforced 
by W3C, and probably shouldn't.

From:

Working together for standards  The 
Web Standards Project: What to do with 
WCAG 2.0?

  Cecil Ward replied:

     "I feel that, despite its many 
serious defects, WCAG2 has a role to 
play. I suggest that it be 
re-targetted, if that’s the right 
word, to become a schema or 
meta-standard, rather than a concrete 
instance of an actual accessibility 
standard. What I mean by this is that 
it should become a statement of 
abstract guiding principles to be used 
when defining actual concrete 
standards as they relate to a 
particular technology. A ‘how to write 
a standard’ document. So that if, say, 
a WCAG 1.1 or 1.2 or whatever for 
(X)HTML is produced, then that 
concrete standard should be built to 
conform to WCAG2. A statement of 
guiding principles is valuable in 
itself, and its abstract nature would 
not then be something to be 
criticised. Concrete standards should 
then be available to give concise 
practical guidance, while the 
philosophy behind their development 
would not have to be on show up 
front."

Wayne





Wayne Dick PhD
Chair Computer Engineering and 
Computer Science, CSU, Long Beach
Coordinator of Academic Technology 
Accessibility, CSU System

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2007 18:28:21 UTC