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

RE: Comments on WCAG 2 Requirements

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 18:03:08 -0500
To: "'Ian B. Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-id: <000001c1f7ad$afa3e040$917f8e8d@laptop600>
See below   GV

Gregg

------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Ind Engr - Biomed - Trace,  Univ of Wis
gv@trace.wisc.edu

 
The comment about being
> able to choose to not satisfy a checkpoint concerned me since it
> seems inconsistent with conformance (unless it isn't inconsistent,
> but that's not clear from the document).

[GV:]   AHH.  Good point.  This was before the latest conformance
approach.  I will have this brought up for discussion so it can be
changed.



> > RE SUGGESTION #6  - CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE SAME URI
> > Your suggestion of having all the versions available from the same
home
> > page does satisfy this item.   As does having an "accessible
version"
> > link off of an inaccessible page - as long as the link is
accessible.
> > So I'm not sure you do disagree.  Do you?
> 
> Here's what I think I understand:
> 
>   a) For some users, alternatives will be necessary.
>   b) In terms of WCAG 2.0, it doesn't matter whether the alternatives
>      reside on the client-side or server-side, as long as the user
>      can get them.
> 
[GV:] RIGHT


> What is confusing is the expression "at the same URI". I first
> read this to mean "by dereferencing a single URI" (which implied
> content negotiation) rather than as "there must be a single Web
> page that includes links to all alternatives" (or something
> similar). Thus, I think clarification is necessary.
> 
> Meanwhile, if I were to rate the requirement, I would give it
> a P2. It seems like a P1 that the alternatives exist (and perhaps
> I should have to provide URIs to all alternatives in a conformance
> claim). It seems like a P2 to have access to all alternatives from
> a single location.

[GV:] It might be a P2.  we didn't get in to that in the consensus
statements.  The concern I remember was that sometime the alternates
existed but there was no way to know that.. or to get to them in some
cases.
Received on Thursday, 9 May 2002 19:03:45 GMT

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