W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2006

RE: What does WCAG mean by "a set of Web units"

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 07:39:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CCDBDCBFA650F74AA88830D4BACDBAB5130FA5A8@wdcrobe2m02.ed.gov>
To: "Loretta Guarino Reid" <lguarino@adobe.com>, "WAI WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

I maintain that this issue is a red herring.  I expect to make a similar assertion when the discussion again turns to baseline.  My opinion on this is informed by six years experience of routinely enforcing another set of web standards, 508 1194.22.  Those provisions are less than rigorous in their use of  (web) page(s) / site / content, but the evidence is that this is not a significant defect.
http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/standards.htm#Subpart_b

The ambiguity rarely comes up, and when it does, it is plain that someone is trying to twist words as excuse not to have to the obvious work required.

In the absence of consensus that we revert to plain common use of the terms web page(s) / site,  I propose that the SC in question be rewritten to avoid the terms altogether:

2.4.1  A mechanism is available to bypass block of content that are repeated.

2.4.2  More than one way is available to locate content where content is not the result of, or a step in, a process or task.

2.4.7  Information about the user's location is available.

3.2.3  Navigation mechanisms that are repeated occur in the same relative order each time they are repeated, unless a change is initiated by the user.

3.2.4  Components that have the same functionality are identified consistently.

This is similar to the approach I suggested before, which was to make peace with the term "content":
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2006JanMar/0248.html
Received on Friday, 18 August 2006 11:39:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:46 GMT