W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 1999

Re: Conformance proposal re-drafted (editorial FWIW)

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 09:06:46 -0500
Message-Id: <199903231403.JAA26927@relay.interim.iamworld.net>
To: dd@w3.org, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 10:26 AM 3/23/99 +0100, Daniel Dardailler wrote:
>
> 
>> 5. Conformance: 
>> 
>> This document defines three conformance levels:
>> - Conformance Level "A": satisfying all Priority 1 checkpoints;
>> - Conformance Level "Double-A": satisfying all Priority 1 and 2
checkpoints; 
>> - Conformance Level "Triple-A": satisfying all Priority 1, 2, and 3
>> checkpoints. 
>
>It's fine that we use speech friendly names but I don't see any reason
>why we do not also include the read (visual or braille) friendly
>version. I suggest something along:
>
>  - Conformance Level "AAA" or "Triple-A": satisfying all Priority 1, 2,
and 3
>    checkpoints. 
>
>Either that or we include in the rec spec icons for A, AA and AAA with
>alt="Double-A", etc.
>

This sounds good if we can get it done.  As I recall we rejected the <ABBR
title="Double-A">AA</ABBR> solution because of non-support for TITLE on
ABBR in current user agent implementations.

Note that this favors the idea that inline non-phonetic text structures
(including smileys) and multiline graphical compositions made out of text
characters are more similar than they are different.  It is just that for
inline objects we have ABBR and ACRONYM and for multilines we only have
OBJECT and IMG.  But since ALT on IMG is supported in browsers, in this
document to be read now, we should use the IMG technique.

Are we using footnotes?  The highest and best implementation of this IMHO
from a technical perspective is that the text of the document use A, Double
A, and Triple A (without hyphens) in the defining paragraph text and a
footnote say "This may be iconified as 'AAA' in print so long as in
softcopy the pronunciation as "Triple A" is clear.  Two HTML 4.0
implementations which conform to this requirement are <ABBR and IMG solutions>.
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 1999 09:03:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:46:59 GMT