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

Re: Why we will never find a good version of 3.3 (and what's wrong with WCAG 2.0)

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:13:45 -0700
Message-Id: <a05100304b7a6d92f49d6@[10.0.1.17]>
To: "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 3:13 AM -0700 2001/8/20, Charles F. Munat wrote:
>If it were up to me, I would break out nav and comp and make three
>guidelines: WCAG, WCNG, and WCCG, for Accessibility, Navigability, and
>Comprehensibility respectively. If we did this, I expect that WCAG would be
>slightly smaller, WCNG would be of moderate size, and WCCG would be as large
>or larger than the current guidelines. That's how much attention
>comprehensibility deserves (hell, needs).
>OK, everyone gasp and yell "NO WAY!"
>This is important, so I will start a new thread for it. And yes, I'm
>serious.

I don't think I'll yell that.  It's an intriguing suggestion, but
perhaps you are actually describing three different sections of WCAG
2.0 -- instead of the current guidelines now.  In other words it might
be possible to include this within one document's structure, but maybe
not THIS document we're working on right now.

I also agree with you that it doesn't seem like a checkpoint because it
just states a principle instead of telling what to do or how to do it.

--Kynn

-- 
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Reef North America
Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network
Tel +1 949-567-7006
________________________________________
BUSINESS IS DYNAMIC. TAKE CONTROL.
________________________________________
http://www.reef.com
Received on Monday, 20 August 2001 11:58:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:11 GMT