- From: zara <catherine.roy@w3qc.org>
- Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 09:03:08 -0800 (PST)
- To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
- Cc: "Guide Lines list" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Bruce Bailey wrote: > The point is that it seems to me that WCAG 2.0 should use regulatory > language for the success criteria. I am not aware of compelling reasons > to the contrary, and would welcome such information. It may be worth considering that from an internationalization perspective, how laws are written may differ depending on language and culture (for example, here in Canada, there are differences in how laws and policies are worded in Québec, the province of Québec having a civil law tradition and Canada having a common law tradition). Despite the fact that the only definitive version of WCAG is English, it would be difficult, in my humble opinion, to adopt a specific regulatory language to suit every situation in every country. Rewording will be inevitable so I believe the importance is rather to ensure that the guidelines are written clearly to avoid any ambiguity. This, incidentally, would also greatly facilitate translations which, although not considered definitive, are nonetheless somewhat encouraged by W3C and an important element in helping non-Anglophones to better understand and adequately implement these guidelines. Best regards, Catherine -- Catherine Roy, consultante www.catherine-roy.net 514.525.9490
Received on Sunday, 27 November 2005 17:03:24 UTC