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

Re: REVISED Web Page Proposal - Version 2.0

From: Carlos A Velasco <Carlos.Velasco@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 21:04:15 +0100
Message-ID: <454CF23F.2060408@fit.fraunhofer.de>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Hi Jason,

Jason White wrote:
> ...
> Maybe the rule should be this:
> Where two or more primary resources (together with any subsidiary resources
> that may be rendered simultaneously with them) are obtainable from the same
> URI, we partition the set of all such resources into equivalence classes. Two
> resources are equivalent if they convey the same information or provide the
> same functionality, concepts which are already employed elsewhere in the
> guidelines.
> The conformance requirement, then, is that at least one member of each
> equivalence class must satisfy all success criteria at the specified
> conformance level.

This concept of equivalence class is tricky. So if I have a site with a
stylesheet like this (exagerating):

body {
  background-color: #000;
  color: #000;

of course, totally inaccessible unless you use lynx, or deactivate CSS
(or you use a screen-reader). Both renderings will lie within the same
equivalence class (I think). Then, one is accessible, and the other not ...

The point is that if you start to add content-negotiation to any
definition, it becomes soon unmanageable.

> My purpose here is not to express the idea in the most elegant way possible,
> as would need to be done if the proposal were developed further, but simply to
> propose a potential solution to the problem at hand.

The only solution I see is that *all* Web Units must be conformant.

Dr Carlos A Velasco - http://access.fit.fraunhofer.de/
Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte Informationstechnik FIT
  [Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology (FIT)]
  Barrierefreie Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie für Alle
  Schloss Birlinghoven, D53757 Sankt Augustin (Germany)
  Tel: +49-2241-142609 Fax: +49-2241-1442609
Received on Saturday, 4 November 2006 20:04:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:01 UTC