W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 12:34:27 -0500
To: "'Ineke van der Maat'" <inekemaa@xs4all.nl>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050527173428.B383A1CC3F8@m14.spamarrest.com>

That is a good question Ineke,

I think it breaks down into two questions.

1 - should someone who conforms to WCAG 1-AAA  automatically 
    conform to WCAG 2-Level 3 ??

2 - should WCAG 2.0 provide any improved access (which would 
    Preclude #1)  along with fixing the problems with 1.0 ??

We would actually like to do both.   But the best I know if is that we have
talked about people choosing which they want - and also possibly allowing
old content to follow one with new the other.   But these are just
discussions so far. 

Your thoughts? 

 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: Ineke van der Maat [mailto:inekemaa@xs4all.nl] 
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 11:30 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call

Hello Greg,

You wrote;
> If they do not want to do this - they do not have to.  And I can see no
> conditions under which phantasy sites would ever be required to conform to
> Level 3.   So it is just guidance on what to do if you want to.
>

Because all my pages, including my phantasy-poems,  now conform to wcag-AAA.

And why should not that be possible with wcag 2.? And I assume i am not the 
only one who is writing phantasy-poems and conform to WCAG 1.0-AAA now.

greetings
Ineke van der Maat
Received on Friday, 27 May 2005 17:34:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:37 UTC