Re: Alternative definition of "Web site"

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jason White" <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
To: "Web Content Guidelines" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2003 3:36 AM
Subject: Re: Alternative definition of "Web site"



>Someone pointed out to me in private e-mail that a Web site can be
>controlled by several different entities. For example an internet
>service provider may host users' content on its Web site; that content
>itself is created and controlled by each individual.
>
>In that case the conformance claim would have to say, for example:
>
>This Web site, excluding personal pages created by users of the
>service, meets WCAG 2.0 at the minimum level.

Hum... this will exclude all the web sites CMS-generated from the WCAG
check...

Also, remembering the claim of WCAG 1.0 [1], in "Scope of the claim" there
is the following text:
"By default, a conformance icon refers to a single page. If the claim is
meant to apply to include more than one page, the conformance icon must be
accompanied by explicit scope information explaining which pages are covered
by the claim."

So, IMHO, is not possible to said "This Web Site .... .meets WCAG 2.0 at the
minimum level" but the claim must be done per single page. If *and only if*
all the page conform would be possible to said "This web site meets WCAG 2.0
...".

Also, would be best to have a conformance claim page by page and/or a unique
web site definition for level areas reached like in the P3P Policy [2]: here
follow an idea about how different policy/conformance claims could be
assigned to different folder.

http://www.ibm.com/w3c/p3p.xml

These my two cents :)

Roberto Scano
---
[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1-Conformance.html.en
[2] http://www.w3.org/P3P/

Received on Sunday, 4 May 2003 08:07:49 UTC