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

Re: WCAG 2.0 Conformance Proposals for 30 November 2006

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 11:15:47 +1100
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <20061207001547.GA5958@jdc>

On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 10:32:13AM -0600, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> How about 
> 
>  2 Non-conforming Content: It is recommended that even non-conforming
> content conform to the extent that it can.

This is more general, and therefore better than the earlier draft language.
> Also we are proposing to add to the claims section something like:
> 
> Progress toward conformance
> 
> Authors who have created content that does not yet conform fully to a
> particular WCAG 2.0 conformance level are encouraged to publish a statement
> on progress toward conformance. This statement would be the same as a
> conformance claim except that it would specify which success criteria have
> been met. It may also be useful to include a list of success criteria not
> yet met in a progress statement.

I like the idea, but I would be more comfortable if any progress statement
were required to assert clearly that the content does not conform at the
specified level. This way, a progress statement could not be confused with a
conformance statement.
Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 00:15:54 GMT

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