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

18 April 2002 WCAG WG minutes

From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 17:56:46 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Summary (also available in the minutes)

- Is checkpoint 1.1 testable?  JS, LR, and GSW agreed to go through some 
test files and report conformance on them.  We hope this will highlight 
issues with the checkpoint and perhaps lead us towards providing more 
helpful informantion in determing conformance. WAC will send a list of test 
files and general instructions to the list to get people started.

- JW proposed a new success criterion to Checkpoint 1.2.  However, there 
are several conformance issues with this checkpoint.  Therefore we will 
leave discussion of this proposal until we have a new draft with a 
conformance scheme.

- Regarding the R1/R2 proposal, we decided to combine them as CMN proposed 
(with minor editorial edits):
The technical requirements of WCAG 2.0 are driven by the needs of people 
with disabilities. However, the users of WCAG 2.0 are a wide audience, and 
the requirements it expresses must be in language that policy makers can 
understand, cite and adopt. While the WCAG WG does not set policy, 
harmonization of accessibility requirements helps drive demand for 
supporting implementations in Web applications.

- We discussed conformance in general.  I missed a lot of this discussion 
due to questions from the plumber.  I think the gist is that GV will 
publish a new draft before next week's meeting that will include an initial 
conformance scheme and it will include some idea of site's publishing their 
own review policy...or coming up with their own.

- Agenda items that we did not get to today:
1. Checkpoint 2.1 (in Gregg's reorganization). The following wording has 
been proposed to address issues of device-independence in this 
checkpoint:  all functions can be operated via character input
2. Treatment of real-time events under checkpoint 2.2 and how these can be 
made accessible.
3. Lee's email about flicker and how the eye works
4. Lee's proposal for color contrast success criteria

- Reminder to review the list of open action items - 

wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
seattle, wa usa
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 17:55:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:41 UTC