W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2008

[wbs] response to 'EOWG Comments on WCAG 2.0, 11 December 2008 Draft'

From: WBS Mailer on behalf of liam.mcgee@communis.co.uk <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:17:01 +0000
To: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Message-Id: <wbs-4db7e963d2bf243eabb59884a9182515@cgi.w3.org>


The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'EOWG Comments on
WCAG 2.0, 11 December 2008 Draft' (Education and Outreach Working Group)
for Liam McGee.



---------------------------------
WCAG 2.0 Abstract and Introduction
----
Comments on the Abstract and Introduction:

Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments): 
current wording: "Guidance about satisfying the Success Criteria in
specific technologies as well as general information about interpreting
the Success Criteria are provided in separate documents."
suggested revision: "Guidance about satisfying the Success Criteria in
specific technologies, as well as general information about interpreting
the Success Criteria, are provided in separate documents."
rationale: makes this sentence easier to parse.


current wording: "At the top are four principles"; "Under the principles
are guidelines"
suggested revision: "There are four principles"; "Within each principle
are guidelines"
rationale: makes the semantic relationship clearer, removes the visual
metaphor of on top and under.

current wording: "Metadata may assist users in finding content most
suitable for their needs."
suggested revision: "_Metadata_ may assist users in finding content most
suitable for their needs."
rationale: metadata is jargon and needs linking to a definition.

current wording: "accessibility supported"
suggested revision: "accessibility-supporting"
rationale: poor grammar - subject/object has been confused, this makes it
difficult to parse. The present form requires that 'accessibility'
supports the technology. This is not the case - the technology must
support accessibility. Hence accessibility-supporting. Hyphenation gives a
further improvement to ease of parsing, making clear that
'accessibility-supporting' is an adjective of 'technology'. Hyphenation is
presently used in some instances of accessibility-supported, and should in
any case be consistent throughout.





---------------------------------
WCAG 2.0 Guidelines section
----
Comments on the Principles, Guidelines, and Success Criteria:

Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments): 





---------------------------------
WCAG 2.0 Conformance section
----
Comments on the Conformance section

Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments): 
Current wording: "This section lists requirements for conformance to WCAG
2.0 as well as information about how to make conformance claims, which are
optional. It also introduces..."
Suggested revision: "This section lists requirements for conformance to
WCAG 2.0. It also gives information about how to make conformance claims,
which are optional, and introduces..."
rationale: it could be legally argued that it the current form leaves it
ambiguous as to whther the phrase 'which is optional' applies to the
second phrase of the sentence, or the first and second. I don't think that
this is a comprehension problem, merely a potential legal one. 

N.B. I am assuming that WCAG2.0 is intended to be referenceable by courts
of law. With that in mind, is it being reviewed by any lawyers?




---------------------------------
WCAG 2.0 Glossary and other Appendices
----
Comments on the Glossary, Acknowledgements, and References.

Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments): 
Definition - Blink
current wording: "switch back and forth between two visual states in a way
that is meant to draw attention"
suggested revision: "switch back and forth between two visual states"
rationale: you can't test authorial intention.

Definition - Context
Should these not be examples rather than a complete definition? - I can't
think of another context, but doesn't mean that one won't be developed
eventually.

Definition - Idiom
Example Numbering has missed 1.

Definition - Programmatically determiend
Spelling error: determined
Capitalisation inconsistency: should be lower case

Other previously active WCAG WG participants and other contributors to
WCAG 2.0
Suggest including *everyone* who has made a contribution to WCAG2.0 - 1500
comments? Gives strong authority to the document. Could be pulled off into
another page.


These answers were last modified on 25 January 2008 at 15:10:30 U.T.C.
by Liam McGee

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/WCAG20-11Dec12008/ until 2008-01-29.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 15:17:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 10:33:47 GMT