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

my action item from Oct 6 telecon plus questions

From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:55:21 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Cc: frederick.boland@nist.gov

In fulfillment of my action item from the Oct 6 WCAG Techniques telecon, I am
proposing that the following text (or something like it) be added to 
"abstract" sections in the various July 30 WCAG techniques documents:

"Use of the illustrative techniques given in this document may make it more
likely for an offering to demonstrate conformance to WCAG 2.0 success 
criteria (by
passing the relevant tests in the WCAG 2.0 test suite to be developed) than if
these illustrative techniques are not used.

There may be other techniques besides those given in this document that may be
used to demonstrate conformance to WCAG 2.0; in that case, it is encouraged to
submit those techniques to the WCAG WG for consideration for inclusion in this
document, so that as complete a set of techniques as possible may be
maintained by the WCAG WG as a public resource."

This text is slightly stronger than what is currently in the "abstract"
sections. The motivation for this proposal is to: (1) more strongly 
encourage offerers
to consider using the techniques given in the WCAG techniques documents (which
are maintained by the WCAG WG), (2). to encourage the submission of
techniques to the WCAG WG, and (3) to include at least a reference to the 
upcoming WCAG
test suite in the WCAG techniques documents.

  I think it is important to mention the upcoming WCAG test suite as 
prominently as possible and as soon as possible in the WCAG documentation, 
for QA and public education reasons. (EXAMPLE: the CSS module template has 
subsections specifically reserved for test suite
discussion.   I'm assuming the WCAG WG is intending to develop a test 
suite, because of the designation "testing and test suites" on the WCAG WG 
web site, but if I'm mistaken, I apologize in advance).


ASIDE: Two "side questions" that I still have come to mind:

(1) I am still a little confused as to how all the WCAG "layers" (test suite,
checklist, general techniques, specific techniques, etc., guidelines) fit 
together in a
way coherent to a user. Is it possible to add more of an explanation at the
appropriate place in the WCAG documentation?

(2) I feel that perhaps more specific information may be needed in certain
instances as to exactly how, by using a specific technique given in a WCAG 
document, a particular success criterion may be satisfied, or particular tests
in the upcoming WCAG test suite may be passed. A technique is given as 
"related" to
a guideline, but is it always obvious how the use of that technique would
demonstrate conformance as mentioned previously? Perhaps some "bridge"
language connecting the technique to the relevant success criterion/test(s)
may be appropriate in a few instances?

Thanks and best wishes,
Tim Boland
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2004 12:55:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:51 UTC