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

RE: Numbering Success Criteria

From: Lee Roberts <leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:20:37 -0800
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000601c29fd1$3c149bc0$5f814094@rose>

I think option 3 serves best because it removes the confusion presented
in the other options.  It definitely made sense to me where the other
options only added confusion when scanning.

Lee

-----Original Message-----
From: Wendy A Chisholm [mailto:wendy@w3.org]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 10:22 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Numbering Success Criteria



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 15:21:24 GMT

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