W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Suggested format for the WCAG 2.0

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 08:27:07 -0800
Message-Id: <>
To: <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: "GL - WAI Guidelines WG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 07:05 AM 3/16/2001 , Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>1)  There is a WCAG Base document which provides the level 1 and Level 2
>      (For the time being the three levels are being called
>              Level 1 - Guidelines
>              Level 2 - Checkpoints
>              Level 3 - Checkpoint Solutions

I like this as much as I like any terminology choices.  I acknowledge
that we will always find someone who doesn't like any given term,
and this seems a decent compromise with an appropriate focus.

>2)  There are a series of documents which we call  Technology Specific
>Checkpoint Solutions
>These documents use the Level 1 Guidelines as divisions
>The level 2 items are checkpoints in the document

Very good.

We also need a series of documents which we call "Technology
NON-Specific Checkpoint Solutions" or the like, right?  For things
which do not, strictly speaking, fall under any given technology?
Or are we assuming we will include those on the TSCS?

Such a document might be worth making anyway, even if it's not
released, for internal use -- in other words, something that says
to us making TSCS docs, "Here's what you need to include that are
solutions, but which can be used with a number of technologies."

Or we might be assuming that those will fit into the level 2
Checkpoint hierarchy?

>3)  Under each Checkpoint are a series of conditionals that read like
>- If you use the IMG tag than you must do one of the following

Is there more than one conditional per checkpoint?

>Under that conditional - you list all of the things that are acceptable
>checkpoint solutions (which could be a set of things) for that checkpoint
>and that condition.
>      -    The second last item in the list is always:   "Alternate
>Equivalent Solution" ...... though if you use an equivalent method you must
>document it on your website.)
>      -    The last item is a statement that this element is not used.  Such
>as "IMG tag is not used"
>For EACH conditional they MUST then do one of the items or item sets in the
>list (which includes "EQUIVALENT" and "NOT USED")

I like this.  I think I proposed it last year. ;)

>4)  If they are able to check one "checkpoint solution"   for each
>conditional under a checkpoint then they can check off the Checkpoint.
>5)   To be Compliant at any level, you must have checked off all the
>checkpoints for that level.
>(this only works
>- if there is anything that MUST be part of ANY solution for a checkpoint -
>then that should appear in each alternative and it should also appear in the
>Equivalent statement.

Very nice.

Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Reef North America
Tel +1 949-567-7006
Received on Friday, 16 March 2001 11:34:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC