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

RE: Another attempt at the conformance levels (was Action item: Proposed rewrite of conformance section)

From: Yvette P. Hoitink <y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 09:23:44 +0200
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040330072559.E1738146FB@w3c2.w3.org>

John's proposal:
	<begin proposed> 

	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.    may reasonably be applied to all Web resources;
	4.    are testable. some success criteria are machine-testable.
Others require human judgment. Success criteria that require human testing
are capable of yielding consistent results among multiple testers.


	Level 2 success criteria

	1.    Build on Level 1;
	2.    enhance accessibility through presentation;
	3.    may reasonably be applied to all Web resources;
	4.    are testable. some success criteria are machine-testable.
Others require human judgment. Success criteria that require human testing
are capable of yielding consistent results among multiple testers.

	Level 3 success criteria

	1.    May provide essential benefits for users with specific
disabilities;
	2.    may enhance accessibility for a broad range of users with
disabilities;
	3.    may affect content as well as presentation and markup;
	4.    may reasonably be applicable to selected resources;
	5.    are testable. some success criteria are machine-testable.
Others require human judgment. Success criteria that require human testing
are capable of yielding consistent results among multiple testers. 

	</end proposed>

Yvette:

I like this! I especially like the phrase 'minimum accessibility' in the
description of level 1. Perhaps we could even pull that into the
description, for example:

Level 1 - minimum accessibility
Level 2 - basic accessibility
Level 3 - advanced accessbility

The reason why I call level 2 'basic' is because in my opinion, basic
accessibility can only be achieved by setting boundaries on what you can do
in your presentation (requiring good contrast between text and background is
a good example). 

I hope that using phrases like these will stimulate people to aim for level
2 at least. It gives a clear signal that level 1 is only minimal and people
shouldn't think they created a website that is accessible to everyone with a
disability just because they pass level 1. 

Yvette Hoitink
Heritas, Enschede, the Netherlands
E-mail: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl
Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2004 02:54:53 UTC

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