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

RE: Numbering Success Criteria

From: Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:31:13 -0800
Message-ID: <7164D4266FD7B94CA59D551C7FE6618D03D44D3C@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

I think it's important to be able to tell very quickly which criteria
are the minimum, and have that info built into the numbering scheme.  #2
and #3 both do this. Either one of these is fine with me.  

#3 is clearest when reading the doc, but the bracketed info might get
dropped in discussions and/or 3rd party summaries, loosing the level
context.  #2 has the info built right into the number, so it can't get
dropped, but the numbers are bit long.  I'm not sure which is better.

-----Original Message-----
From: Wendy A Chisholm [mailto:wendy@w3.org] 
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 7:22 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org


At the July face to face, we agreed to uniquely number each success
criterion.   The editors have come up with 4 proposals for
discussion.  Please choose the method you prefer or suggest an
alternative.

Option #1:  Number success criteria sequentially (no conformance
information):

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at the Minimum Level if:
      1.1.1  Non-text content that can be expressed in words has a
               text-equivalent explicitly associated with it.
      1.1.2  Non-text content that can not be expressed in words has a
               descriptive label provided as its text-equivalent.
               + The text equivalent should fulfill the same function as
the
               author intended for the non-text content (i.e. it
presents
               all of the intended information and/or achieves the same
               function of the non-text content).

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at Level 2 if:
      1.1.3 The text-equivalent has been reviewed and is believed to
                fulfill the same function as the author intended for the
                non-text content
                (i.e. it presents all of the intended information and/or
                achieves the same function of the non-text content)
      1.1.4  A conformance claim associated with the content asserts
                conformance to this checkpoint at level 2.

======

Option #2  structure the numbering to reflect the conformance level of
each
checkpoint.

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at the Minimum Level if:
      1.1.1.1  Non-text content that can be expressed in words has a
                    text-equivalent explicitly associated with it.
      1.1.1.2  Non-text content that can not be expressed in words has a
                    descriptive label provided as its text-equivalent.
                 + The text equivalent should fulfill the same function
as the
                 author intended for the non-text content (i.e. it
presents
                 all of the intended information and/or achieves the
same
                 function of the non-text content).

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at Level 2 if:
      1.1.2.1  The text-equivalent has been reviewed and is believed to
                   fulfill the same function as the author intended for
the
                   non-text content.  (i.e. it presents all of the
intended
                   information and/or achieves the same function of the 
non-text content)
      1.1.2.2  A conformance claim associated with the content asserts
                    conformance to this checkpoint at level 2.

==========

Option #3  include conformance level in brackets after each sequential
numbering

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at the Minimum Level if:
      1.1.1 [Minimum]  Non-text content that can be expressed in words
has a
                text-equivalent explicitly associated with it.
      1.1.2 [Minimum]  Non-text content that can not be expressed in
words
               has a descriptive label provided as its text-equivalent.
                + The text equivalent should fulfill the same function
as the
                author intended for the non-text content (i.e. it
presents
               all of the intended information and/or achieves the same
               function of the non-text content).

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at Level 2 if:
      1.1.3 [Level 2] the text-equivalent has been reviewed and is
believed
                to fulfill the same function as the author intended for
the
                non-text content (i.e. it presents all of the intended 
information and/or
                achieves the same function of the non-text content)
      1.1.4 [Level 2] a conformance claim associated with the content
asserts
                conformance to this checkpoint at level 2.

==========

Option #4  Identify criteria by letter (e.g., a-c, instead of 1-3) and
include conformance level

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at the Minimum Level if:
      1.1-1a  Non-text content that can be expressed in words has a
                   text-equivalent explicitly associated with it.
      1.1-1b  Non-text content that can not be expressed in words has a
                  descriptive label provided as its text-equivalent.
                  + The text equivalent should fulfill the same function
as the
                  author intended for the non-text content (i.e. it
presents
                  all of the intended information and/or achieves the
same
                  function of the non-text content).

You will have successfully met Checkpoint 1.1 at Level 2 if:
      1.1-2a   The text-equivalent has been reviewed and is believed to
                    fulfill the same function as the author intended for
the
                     on-text content  (i.e. it presents all of the
intended
                    information and/or achieves the same function of the
                    non-text content)
      1.1-2b   A conformance claim associated with the content asserts
                    conformance to this checkpoint at level 2.

-- 
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
http://www.w3.org/WAI/
/--
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 13:31:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:20 GMT