W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: New R1

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 03:59:05 -0400 (EDT)
To: jonathan chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
cc: Gregg Vanderheiden <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "'Judy Brewer'" <jbrewer@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0204070350060.6889-100000@tux.w3.org>
Jonathan's formulation has nothing I don't like in it. "How should policy
makers use WCAG?" is more a FAQ than a thing we should solve by setting
requirements.

I agree the document needs to be clearly written. I agree it should be
understandable in summmary by people who don't want to read endless technical
detail. I just disagree that policy makers are somehow more imortant than
teachers or technical developers (nor are they less important).

My major concern is that anything which is interreted as "this group must
produced something whose content is dictated by what is appropriate for
making a policy" will doom us to failure by making us relevant to only one
set of policies (no idea which one - I guess the one with the best
representation in the working group). It may also cause us to ignore
important technical requirements in the mistaken belief that they are an
unreasonable burden.

Cheers

Charles

On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, jonathan chetwynd wrote:

  I do see your point Charles, however if the group(ie wcag eowg ua...)
  spends very significant amounts of time directing their efforts towards
  a particular audience, then it must be politic to mention this in documents.
  One can only have areas of expertise in which one spends time.

  I have been asking for time to be devoted to a less literate audience
  with little result, on a very regular basis, for a long time.
  the group can have no claim to meeting this need as very little time is
  spent creating documents, or indeed discussing the authoring of them for
  this very large group.


  please compare:

  WCAG 2.0 deliverables are easier to understand and use than WCAG 1.0.
  They are intended for a wider audience.

  R1: WCAG 2.0 deliverables should be more understandable and usable by a
    wider audience than was anticipated for WCAG 1.0, including policy
    makers.   While the WCAG WG does not set policy, harmonization of
    accessibility requirements helps drive demand for supporting
    implementations in Web applications; therefore it should be easy for
    policy makers and individuals responsible for implementing policy  to
    understand, cite and/or adopt WCAG 2.0 and related deliverables.

  thanks






-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI  fax: +33 4 92 38 78 22
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Sunday, 7 April 2002 03:59:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:19 GMT