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

reporting scheme Re: conformance

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 11:44:34 -0400 (EDT)
To: Anne Pemberton <apembert45@yahoo.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0110111135230.8682-100000@tux.w3.org>
The scenario being outlined requires the development of some tools. These are
being developed right now and are avialable as new commercial products for
systems such as FrontPage, Websphere and Dreamweaver - widely deployed
software used by lots of "ordinary folks".

It also requires that people use the new software, which as we know takes
time.

And finally it requires that the way we code the guidelines themselves (the
pointy brackets that nobody sees) is what we would ned to do to make them
usefl for our own needs. It doesn't take time to do - any time at all. You
and I have obviously taken some time in discussing whether it is useful to do
so, and that is longer than it takes me to actually make it happen (at least
as far as what needs to be done by WCAG).

Are you suggesting that the other scenarios outlined at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2001OctDec/0027 ; people who
are developing content and need to solve a problem for a particular person or
group urgently; authoring tools such as the ones mentioned above; evaluation
tools such as Bobby, prompt, taw, schematron, the Wave, and others don't have
an audience, or that I am wrong in assuming that they would use tools which
give more than a "pass/fail" answer for two or three levels of conformance?

Charles


On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Anne Pemberton wrote:

  Charles,
[snip]
      Yes, I have said it would be nice if folks could
  find the pages that meet their needs, but from what
  I've seen of the reporting schemes, this information
  will not be accessible to the ordinary user. Therefore
  the reporting schemes would not satisfy the need for
  users to be able to find content that suits their
  needs. Again, I see no audience for the reporting
  scheme and it seems a waste of time. Maybe it could go
  in the "it would be nice if you did it" category, or
  in the "when user agents can use it" category.
  Remember that the reporting scheme needs to be fully
  accessible, usable, and understandable, if it is ever
  to be used by users.
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2001 12:36:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:16 GMT