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

Re: Usefulness of compliance section in Web Accessible Mobile document

From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:44:39 +0000
Message-ID: <47BAC127.1070607@icra.org>
To: MWI BPWG Public <public-bpwg@w3.org>
CC: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

That's a can of worms Alan, but I think the answer can only be yes, it 
is worth it.

BP lists 60 things you should do, mobileOK Basic tests less than half of 
those, mobileOK Pro will test almost, but probably not quite, all. Even 
so, things like our Testing and Thematic Consistency are at the heart of 
what it's about. I wonder whether one might be able to make the case 
that compliance is the letter of the law cf. following all BPs which is 
to work within the spirit of the law?

Phil.

Alan Chuter wrote:
> Dear EOWG and MWBP WG participants,
> 
> On last Friday's EOWG call in the discussion [1] of the "From Mobile
> Web Best Practices 1.0 to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0"
> document, under ACCESS_KEY [2] it was mentioned that while using
> access keys is not required by WCAG 2.0, using them may be considered
> best practice and so it should be mentioned. My argument is that what
> people are really interested in is whether they achieve compliance or
> not. Should there be another section on doing the right thing even
> when it isn't needed for compliance?
> 
> best regards,
> 
> Alan
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/02/15-eo-minutes.html#action04
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080129/mwbp-wcag20.html#ACCESS_KEYS
> 

-- 
Phil Archer
Chief Technical Officer,
Family Online Safety Institute
w. http://www.fosi.org/people/philarcher/
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 11:45:03 GMT

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