Re: Proposal for WCAG conformance mechanism.

On the whole, Sidar agrees that the results are important to 
determining conformance, and that it is beyond the capability of the 
WCAG group to exhaustively list every possible technique for achieving 
those results.

I think the approach being taken by EuroAccessibility to make it 
clearer whether or not conformance has been achieved to WCAG 1.0 seems 
a good model to continue with. Essentially it breaks down checkpoints 
into more specific questions, which may or may not apply depending on 
the technology used, the content in question, etc. Identifying the 
requirements first at a general level, and then at a more detailed 
level, and testing that these different levels actually match, seems 
the work of the WCAG group.

I'm not convinced that some QA process can be adequately specified to 
ensure that something meets a set of requirements unless that set of 
requirements is clearly detailed enough to test them directly.

Beyond this, I repeat the position of the Sidar group studying WCAG2 in 
spanish, that until the working group has identified the requirements 
on content it is not ready to consider assigning priorities to 
particular requirements, and I add that WCAG should not be overly 
concerned about particular conformance schemes, until that point.

cheers

Chaals

On 18 Mar 2004, at 01:57, Tom Croucher wrote:

> This is a proposal developed by Tom Croucher and Michael Cooper to 
> provide a
> normative mechanism for ensuring compliance with the WCAG without a
> requirement for us to provide normative techniques documents. We 
> suggest
> instead a normative process for verifying techniques that have been 
> applied.
--
Charles McCathieNevile                          Fundación Sidar
charles@sidar.org                                http://www.sidar.org

Received on Monday, 22 March 2004 19:56:56 UTC