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

Re: Techniques harvesting

From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:38:31 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20050819082512.00ae0410@mailserver.nist.gov>
To: "Michael Cooper" <michaelc@watchfire.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Thank you for providing the summary of the discussion results on success
criterion-technique mapping.  I think that this summary will help to 
organize future
work.

I notice that there are no direct links included for
the techniques listed in your summary to specific techniques in the current
WCAG2.0 Techniques Documents (for example, to the HTML Techniques for WCAG2.0
[1], or to the CSS Techniques for WCAG2.0 [2]); the techniques listed in 
your summary are
bulleted, with no such cross-reference to such specific techniques.

Per the previous, are there techniques listed in your summary that are not 
in the current WCAG2.0 techniques documents referenced on the WCAG WG site 
[3]? Conversely, are there techniques in the current WCAG2.0 techniques 
documents on the WCAG WG site [3] that are not in your
summary? Do the existing WCAG2.0 techniques documents on the WCAG WG site
[3] need to be updated for consistency with your summary (as it reflects
current thinking via the teleconference discussions)?

Thanks and best wishes
Tim Boland NIST

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-HTML-TECHS/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-CSS-TECHS/
[3] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/


At 11:47 AM 8/18/2005 -0400, you wrote:

>I have gone through the meeting minutes from the three meetings in June 
>[1], [2], [3] at which we harvested techniques for each of the guidelines. 
>I tried to organize them into technologies: General, HTML, CSS, Script, 
>and "other" - the last category including things like server-side 
>techiques, and technologies like SMIL and SVG.
>
>Note that as we were harvesting techniques we were doing it in the context 
>of a particular success criterion, which is where each technique is 
>mapped. Often we thought suggested techniques might map to other success 
>criteria as well, but we weren't able to capture that information reliably 
>so I ommitted those notes from this.
>
>The collected mapping is available at the following two URLs. The first 
>one is a table aligning techniques, technologies, and success critiera. 
>The second is a list that groups techniques by technology, which I think 
>might be easier for people wanting to focus on a specific technology to use.
>
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2005/06/30-tech-harvest.html
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2005/06/30-tech-harvest-by-tech.html
>
>I apologize for any errors, and will do my best to fix them if you spot 
>something.
>
>Michael
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/30-wai-wcag-minutes.html
>[2] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/07-wai-wcag-minutes.html
>[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/14-wai-wcag-minutes.html
>
>--- Signature ---
>
>Michael Cooper
>Accessibility Product Manager, Watchfire
>1 Hines Rd Suite 200, Kanata, ON  K2K 3C7  Canada
>Tel: +1 (613) 599-3888 x4019
>Fax: +1 (613) 599-4661
>Email: michaelc@watchfire.com
>Web: http://www.watchfire.com/
Received on Friday, 19 August 2005 12:39:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:39 GMT