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

FW: Canonical URL for WCAG 1.0

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:13:28 -0500
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050928181047.1BDB41CC423@eq1.spamarrest.com>

 
At 11:41 AM 9/28/2005, Christophe Strobbe wrote:
>Here's a question that came up while drafting a document on a web 
>evaluation methodology for a research project. The Web Content 
>Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 say that the latest version is at 
>http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT, but the WCAG 2.0 draft uses the 
>URL http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/ (in the abstract). Which URL should be 
>used for WCAG 1.0, now and in the future? Is WCAG 2.0 going to replace 
>WCAG 1.0 at http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT once it is finished?

This is a good question. The answer is easy once you understand that WCAG
1.0 and 2.0 are two different documents both of which will remain valid
docs.   Wendy summarized this well.  Here is what she wrote.

"   
WCAG 2.0 will *not* replace WCAG 1.0 at http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT
WCAG 2.0 will be published at: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/  This is the
approved "short name" for this document.

A related example: the CSS specs
CSS 1 is published as http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1
CSS 2 is published as
<http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2>http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2

If WCAG 2.0 were a revised Recommendation (of WCAG 1.0) then we would use
the same short name, but it is not a revised Recommendation [hence it gets a
new name].

--wendy "



Gregg

------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
<http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848  
For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/
 
Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2005 18:13:53 GMT

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