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

Re: EOWG's replies to WCAG WG resolutions of EOWG comments on May 2007 Draft of WCAG 2.0

From: Wayne Dick <wed@csulb.edu>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2008 12:45:05 -0800
Message-ID: <47AE10D1.9010504@csulb.edu>
To: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
CC: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org, "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>


WCAG 2.0 Latest Draft is not perfect.  It is just great.  I think 
further work is unnecessary and it time to go forward.  It's time to 
click champagne glasses.

We have interim technical reports like ARIA to fill the gap until the 
next giant shift.  An accessibility standard should stand for a decade, 
and this one can.

Many people point to a specific medical class of disabilities that are 
not met.  I say, show me the functionality that is not met by WCAG 2.0.  
If there is missing functionality we can tag it on in an update or a 
change to Understanding and the Quick Ref. 

At university we hare held to an honest, but less definite rule: equally 
effective access.  I have looked at the functional needs served by WCAG 
2.0 and the sufficient techniques, and as far as they go, the techniques 
for WCAG 2.0 meet my gut test for equally effective access.  Web sites 
and web technologies that meet WCAG 2.0 and use sufficient  techniques 
provide equal timeliness, equal quality and information in a form that a 
user can in the mode suitable to their needs. 

Wayne
Received on Saturday, 9 February 2008 20:45:27 GMT

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