W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2004

REGRETS - Re: Agenda April 29th

From: Doyle Burnett <dburnett@sesa.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 10:57:30 -0800
To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, W3C Web Content <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BCB6901A.281B%dburnett@sesa.org>

On 4/28/04 9:26 PM, "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu> wrote:

> 
> Time: 2100 UTC        (4 PM US Eastern)
> Number:  +1-617-761-6200, passcode 9224
> irc.w3.org 6665, channel #wai-wcag
> 
> Agenda for this week
> 
> 1. Action items  
> 
> 2. Conformance 
> 
>   - Do all items at all 3 levels needed to be testable?  [1]
> 
>   - Do we want to have advisory items that are not testable in the
> guidelines doc?
> 
>   - Working definition of the criteria for placing items in each of the
> three levels [2] 
> 
>   - consensus about whether or not all of the 3rd group
>     need to be met to claim 3rd category of conformance?
> 
>  - what do we want to call the 3 levels of conformance
>        - should we coord w/EO
>        - is the naming more of a marketing than technical issue?)
> 
> 3.  open issues, 
> -  Color - Issue 317
>         <http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=317>
> 
> Gregg
> 
> 
> 
> [1]  Current Proposal
> Success criteria for all levels would be testable.   Some success criteria
> may be machine-testable. Others may require human judgment.  Success
> criteria that require human testing would, in the judgment of the working
> group members, yield consistent results among multiple knowledgeable
> testers.   
> 
> 
> [2]  Latest proposal - based on John's submission and working group
> discussion - but does not yet reflect our decisions regarding scope - so
> will need discussion and editing.
> 
> LEVEL 1 SUCCESS CRITERIA
> 
>   1. Do not set limits on content or presentation;
> 
>   2. Achieve a minimum level of accessibility through markup,
>       scripting, or other technologies that interact with user agents,
>       including assistive technologies;
> 
>   3. The working group felt could be reasonably be applied to all Web
>        resources;
> 
> 
> LEVEL 2 SUCCESS CRITERIA
> 
>  1. Build on Level 1;
> 
>  2. Increase accessibility both though additional facilitation of user
> agent based      
>      accessibility and through content and/or presentation that provides
> direct 
>      accessibility without requiring intervention by user agents or
> assistive technology;
> 
>  3. The working group felt could be reasonably be applied to all Web
> resources;
> 
> 
> LEVEL 3 SUCCESS CRITERIA
> 
> 1. Go beyond Level 1 and 2 to increase direct and user agent enhanced
> accessibility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2004 14:57:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:29 GMT