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

Re: FW: Mock-up of merged WCAG 2.0 and XAG

From: Kerstin Goldsmith <kerstin.goldsmith@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:04:06 -0800
Message-ID: <40688F46.4050205@oracle.com>
To: lisa seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
Cc: "'Ian B. Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Another vote for Ian's proposal - can we make an agenda item of this for 
this or next Thursday?  I believe that Ian might just be correct in 
thinking that this might speed up and simplify the WCAG 2.0 timeline.

Cheers,
-Kerstin

lisa seeman wrote:

>My vote is with Ian too on this- it is more then techniques to conform
>to WCAG. If we want to change WCAG to be more like XAG however....
>All the best
>Lisa Seeman
> 
>Visit us at the UB Access website
>UB Access - Moving internet accessibility
> 
>
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org 
>>[mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ian B. Jacobs
>>Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2004 4:28 PM
>>To: Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
>>Cc: Gregg Vanderheiden; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; 'Judy Brewer'
>>Subject: Re: FW: Mock-up of merged WCAG 2.0 and XAG
>>
>>
>>On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 03:51, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>XAG could become a Techniques Document for WCAG 2.0....
>>>Like HTML, CSS, etc. techniques.
>>>What do you think about this proposal?
>>>      
>>>
>>I think XAG requirements deserve to be at the same level
>>as WCAG requirements. 
>>
>>In the proposal linked below, the basic idea is that
>>WCAG 2.0 would say "To build accessible content, you start 
>>with a format that supports accessibility." What defines
>>"an accessible format"? Another series of requirements that
>>are already well-known to the WAI Community:
>>
>>  * if the format supports audio, it must also support
>>    the ability to associate a synchronized transcript.
>>  * if the format supports images, it must also support
>>    text equivalents, 
>>
>>And so forth. These are some of the XAG requirements today. 
>>They themselves have techniques associated with them:
>>
>> * What's a good way to allow authors to provide alternatives?
>>   The "alt" approach of HTML or the "switch" element of SMIL?
>>   What are the advantages of each approach? 
>>
>> _ Ian
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>[2] http://www.w3.org/2003/11/12-ij-wcag20.html
>>>>        
>>>>
>>-- 
>>Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>>Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>
Received on Monday, 29 March 2004 16:14:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:55 UTC