RE: Supporting Technology

I agree with Michael Cooper's response: I think both developers and
evaluators-and for that matter trainers and teachers-will find it very
valuable to have the *option* of using separate checklists for each of
the technologies (main, supporting) they're using.  The ability to
generate a comprehensive checklist that integrates all the technologies
used for a particular resource would be valuable as well.
 
One thing I've always liked about the WCAG 1.0 checklist of checkpoints
(aside from the title!) is the way it's organized by types of content.
The phrasing "If you use ... " x or y or z is helpful, especially in
training sessions when I can *hear* that people's eyes have begun to
glaze over: I can resuscitate them by pointing out that they need only
worry about the checkpoints that apply to the types of content they use
and about the priority levels they're committed to.
 
John
 
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 4:15 PM
To: 'Sailesh Panchang'; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Supporting Technology
 
Right
 
   In conjunction with techniques we will be developing   "Technology
Specific Checklists".    These checklists will be what people actually
use in practice since they will say specifically what must be done with
each technology to meet the WCAG.    
 
The checklists will be for technologies or sets of technologies that can
meet all of the WCAG 2.0 guidelines.  They will have to allow a person
to at least meet all of the level 1 success criteria.  ( or else they
would have to start out with a statement that in order for content
presented with this technology to meet WCAG 2.0 all content must also be
presented in another technology in a form that did meet minimum WCAG 2.0
--- which of course is not very encouraging) 
 
 So there would be no CSS checklist.  Only an HTML plus CSS checklist.
Or an XHTML plus CSS checklist.   Or XHTML + CSS + Scripting checklist. 
 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Sailesh Panchang
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 12:52 PM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Supporting Technology
 
Wendy,
Introducing  concept of supporting technology and  host technology is
really important for the Gateway doc ... and perhaps in the main WCAG
2.0 doc.
Identifying CSS, scripting etc. as supporting and XHTML as host
technology  will be really helpful. Necessary to point out the
supporting technologies cannot be used independently to develop Web
content and cannot be used to satisfy all checkpoints. Saying this
explicitly will avoid confusion.
 
From: Wendy A Chisholm <mailto:wendy@w3.org>  
To: Tim Boland <mailto:frederick.boland@nist.gov>  ; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org 
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 12:55 PM
Wendy writes:
We have not been assuming that someone could use CSS alone to satisfy
all
of the success criteria.  Since CSS is used in conjunction with other
technologies, we have discussed marking the dependencies between
techniques (in our xml source) so that we can generate checklists that
will pull
together the various technology-specific pieces that someone might need.
Client-side scripting is also a "supporting" technology rather than
a "host" technology.  It will not be possible to meet all success
criteria using only a supporting technology.
	 
	Sailesh Panchang
	Senior Accessibility Engineer 
	Deque Systems,11180  Sunrise Valley Drive, 
	4th Floor, Reston VA 20191
	Tel: 703-225-0380 Extension 105 
	E-mail: sailesh.panchang@deque.com
	Fax: 703-225-0387
	* Look up <http://www.deque.com> *