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

RE: Guidelines or Standards

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 07:38:22 -0500
Message-ID: <CCDBDCBFA650F74AA88830D4BACDBAB50B2D4A5B@wdcrobe2m02.ed.gov>
To: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: "Guide Lines list" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

> So I think we are in a situation where we must:
> - focus on writing a good technical guideline standard (called a recommendation in W3C parlance). 
> - wording it in a form most appropriate to this task;
> - but keeping in mind that others may be using it for guidance for regulatory activity and we don't want to write it in a way that makes it hard for them to do that well. 

Thinking about this some more, it seems to me that WCAG (1.0 and 2.0) are very different than the other W3C Technical Recommendations with which I am familiar.  For lack of better terminology, WCAG is along the lines of usage whereas HTML, XML, CSS, SVG, etc. are all very much detailed definitions.  This leads me to a few questions:

(1) Does the W3C have guidance as to the format of TR, especially the "lowest level" parts (the success criteria in the case of WCAG 2.0)?

(2) Are there other W3C TR that are along the lines of useage in a fashion similar to WCAG?

(3) Does W3C differentiate between these two categories of standards (what I have characterized here as usage versus definitive)?

(4) I am still looking for an example from WCAG 1.0 or 2.0 that is harmed (or is made less accurate) by being rephrased in statutory language.

Received on Monday, 12 December 2005 12:38:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:57 UTC