W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2003

Latest Draft of WCAG 2.0 Guidelines -- for discussion

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 23:48:43 -0600
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-id: <009e01c39de0$5608ac70$056fa8c0@USD320002X>
We have now compiled all of the edits etc from the last two months into the
new format that we settled on as our working draft at the last
teleconference meeting.

It is available at



The change history document is at 

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/change-history.html .


This draft brings together the best of what we have and is organized in the
fashion that has addressed key concerns we have had with previous drafts. 


In particular

-          it has eliminated the dual dimension conformance scheme and terms
core and extended (see issues  368, 504, 549, 550)

-          it (will have when we are done )  removed 'untestable' items and
moved them to the Techniques Gateway doc. (this will occur after we receive
the recommendations from the subcommittee and then walk the document). 

-          It has a structure which is cognitively like WCAG 1.0 in that it
has items that fall into three levels of effort.  Level 1 being required for
any conformance.   Level 2 being the next level of effort that is 'above and
beyond' the minimum required.  And Level 3 for items that are not expected
to be reasonably applicable to most sites as general practice.  (see issues
396, 452, 552)

-          It does NOT say that level 1 is for access and imply that Level 2
and 3 are usability.  It acknowledges that some people may need level 2 or
three to access sites but that items in these levels are not required for
minimum conformance. 

-          All of the success criteria are marked (temporarily) as being
either Type [X] or Type [Y].  Type X are items that do not affect the
default presentation of the content such as alt text and markup.  Type Y are
items that do such as adding structure, adding graphics etc.)



Not addressed in this version.

-          The "Plain Language" (or at least plainer language) edits --
consensus we should do this --  recommendations being worked on by a


-          The "untestable" filtering - consensus we should do this --
recommendations being worked on by another subgroup. 


-          A view that shows only the Level 1 criteria by themselves (except
as a non-normative view of the document).   That is, the level 1 items are
shown near the Level 2 items -- rather than listing all the guidelines with
their Level 1 success criteria followed by all of the guidelines with their
level 2 criteria followed by a list of the guidelines with their level 3
success criteria.  -- some feel we should do this.  Others feel we should


-          A really clean way to label the guidelines that have no Level 1
criteria on them.    (Perhaps call them  Level 2 Guidelines??)



Please give it a read and post any issues so we can discuss on Thursday.
We should be getting the Plain language and 'untestable' recommendation
lists soon - so don't worry about those.  But do look over for any new


Note that, as always, everything in this document is up for review and
revision.   But it looks like we are beginning to close on the overall
structure and format.    Now to work out the bugs. 



Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
< <http://trace.wisc.edu/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848  
For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/



Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 00:52:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:46 UTC