Re: [techs] Techniques requirements ready for TR

Roberto,
Those look like reasonable clarifications to make.
Thanks,
--wendy

At 01:22 PM 2/5/2003, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:

>At point 3.4 the title is:
>
>Relation to WCAG
>
>and in the document there is not a reference about what is WCAG.
>I think that for make more "clear" the documentation, we need to make these
>two changes:
>
>1) add the (WCAG 2.0) near the first phrase so there is officially a
>"reference" to the acronym used in the text):
>The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0) creates a
>technology-independent set of Web accessibility guidelines by providing a
>set of high-level guidelines, and providing technology-specific information
>in auxiliary documents that are more frequently updated and may be
>non-normative.
>
>
>2) change the text where is wrote WCAG into WCAG 2.0:
>
>a) introduction, at third paragraph:
>Developers of non-W3C technologies may use the schema to publish their own
>techniques documents that show how to use their technologies to conform to
>WCAG 2.0.
>
>b) title in 3.4 with the follow title:
>Relation to WCAG 2.0
>
>c) First point in 3.4:
>Each technique must map to a specific WCAG 2.0 Success Criterion or
>Additional Idea by URI and number for clarity and to enable auto generation
>of hybrid Guidelines/Techniques documents.
>
>
>I think that's all folks :)
>Roberto
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>
>To: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>; "Michael Cooper"
><michaelc@watchfire.com>; "WAI GL (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 7:03 PM
>Subject: Re: [techs] Techniques requirements ready for TR
>
>
>Hello Roberto,
>
>It is not a mistake.  We removed it for the following reasons:
>
>1. WCAG 2.0 was the only reference in that section.
>
>2. There were several places in the document where we directly linked to an
>external resource. WCAG 2.0 was the only one that we had an indirect link
>to  (i.e., instead of linking directly to WCAG 2.0 in the text, we linked
>to a target in the references section and then the target linked to the
>external WCAG 2.0 resource). Instead, we now directly link to all of the
>resources throughout the document.
>
>Is this an issue that you feel needs to be fixed?  If so, does it need to
>be fixed before moving to TR?
>
>Thanks,
>--wendy
>
>At 12:48 PM 2/5/2003, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:
>
> >Hi Michael,
> >i see that the point 6 has been removed:
> >
> >6 References
> >WCAG2
> >Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, B. Caldwell, W. Chisholm, J.
> >White, G. Vanderheiden. World Wide Web Consortium, 25 January 2001, revised
> >22 August 2002.
> >
> >
> >is this a mistake?
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Michael Cooper" <michaelc@watchfire.com>
> >To: "WAI GL (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> >Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 5:29 PM
> >Subject: [techs] Techniques requirements ready for TR
> >
> >
> >
> >At the teleconference last Thursday we agreed on some final edits needed
> >before posting the Techniques Requirements draft [1] to the TR page. We
>have
> >also discussed this with Judy Brewer and made a few additional edits.
>Please
> >review the draft to see if there are any burning issues. If we don't
>receive
> >objections we will post this to TR on Friday.
> >
> >Michael
> >
> >[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/sources/wd-wcag2-tech-req.html
> >
> >Michael Cooper
> >Accessibility Project Manager
> >Watchfire
> >1 Hines Rd
> >Kanata, ON  K2K 3C7
> >Canada
> >+1 613 599 3888 x4019
> >http://bobby.watchfire.com/
>
>--
>wendy a chisholm
>world wide web consortium
>web accessibility initiative
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/
>/--

-- 
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
http://www.w3.org/WAI/
/--

Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2003 15:12:27 UTC