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

Baseline and Conformance

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:34:23 -0600
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <010601c5e62d$c360e070$8c17a8c0@NC6000BAK>
Sorry 

One more topic we need to fix today.

 

 

In working on the baseline writeup some problems with how we talk about
baseline emerged.

 

I think that we need to separate the concepts of 

BASELINE

And 
RELIES ON

 

What a particular URI "relies on" has to be a subset (or equal ) to the
Baseline. 

 But the baseline may be specified by some external body (company ,customer
etc) and may have many more technologies in it. 

Thus the Baseline might include many more technologies than a particular URI
relies on. 

 

That would make the "Relies on" statement in a conformance statement
optional.  Very useful but optional.   

 

Baseline however would be required. 

 

(note 'relies on' could change from URI to URI and from day to day)

 

Note also that a conformance claim is not needed to conform.

 

 

Since we would need to make these changes in the conformance section I am
posting them out. 

I had hoped to have a baseline description doc done too but until we discuss
this - there are a couple key questions I can't write up.

 

So the plan

1 - cover this in today's call

2 - make the changes in the front-matter that we need to release the draft. 

3 - fix up draft of baseline doc  and release draft for comment and
discussion

4 - next week discuss and finalize the baseline doc 

 

Talk to you soon

 

 


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/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848  
For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/

 <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/>  

 

 
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2005 19:34:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:40 GMT