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

Re: WCAG 1.0 - checkpoint 11.4, policy and parallel web sites

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 14:18:57 -0500
To: "Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, jbrewer@w3.org
Message-Id: <1094152737.5787.29.camel@seabright>
On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 14:08, Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) wrote:
> This could mean that we could have inaccessible web sites with "n" other parallel web sites.
> This could be good if contents are presented in different "version" by css or xslt, but made "n" parallel sites - imho - means not support the "design for all". I think that this point is one of the point that could be rewieved in a wcag 1.0 second edition and/or with an integration in the cited note (a wcag errata?)

I haven't been involved in WCAG discussions lately, so I am
behind where people in the WCAG WG are in their thinking about this
checkpoint and more generally about alternative content (e.g., whether
it suffices to have a generic version available from which
specially-tailored versions could be produced, whether all alternatives
have to be available client side, whether some tailored
versions could reside on the server until requested, etc.).

I think that your interpretation of WCAG 1.0 is correct. Whether
it is desirable is another question, presumably one the WCAG WG
is considering.

 _ Ian


> ----- Messaggio originale -----
>     Da: "Ian B. Jacobs"<ij@w3.org>
>     Inviato: 02/09/04 20.50.37
>     A: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG"<rscano@iwa-italy.org>
>     Cc: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "jbrewer@w3.org"<jbrewer@w3.org>
>     Oggetto: Re: WCAG 1.0 - checkpoint 11.4, policy and parallel web sites
>       On Mon, 2004-08-30 at 03:07, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:
>     > Hi to all the group.
>     > I hope this message isn't off topic.
>     > 
>     > This regards the WCAG 1.0 Reccomandation [1] and expecially the
>     > checkpoint 11.4:
>     > 
>     > 11.4 If, after best efforts, you cannot create an accessible page,
>     > provide a link to an alternative page that uses W3C technologies, is
>     > accessible, has equivalent information (or functionality), and is
>     > updated as often as the inaccessible (original) page. [Priority 1]
>     
>     [snip]
>     
>     > Discussing in web accessibility mailing lists, also with the
>     > partecipation of some lawyers, as explained the checkpoint *could*
>     > authorize - after best efforts - to create parallel web sites that is a
>     > group of "alternative page for every page".
>     
>     Yes, as far as I understand, that is true. Why is this problematic
>     (other than for the reasons cited in the checkpoint and note)?
>     
>      _ Ian
>     
>     -- 
>     Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>     Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
>         
> 
> [Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.]
-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447

Received on Thursday, 2 September 2004 19:19:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:58 UTC