W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2007

RE: Conformance: sufficient techniques para

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 00:26:08 -0600
To: <boland@nist.gov>, "'Michael Cooper'" <cooper@w3.org>
Cc: "'List WAI GL'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <030701c74b4a$17775c70$5e00c44b@NC84301>

Perhaps we should say 'knowledgeable' rather than expert.  But otherwise
this is a statement of importance, not a requirement so I don't see a
problem with it and it is essential that those proposing something as
sufficient be knowledgeable about WCAG and disability.


Gregg
 -- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of boland@nist.gov
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:47 PM
> To: Michael Cooper
> Cc: List WAI GL
> Subject: Re: Conformance: sufficient techniques para
>
>
> Thanks for this work.  I don't understand the need for the
> final sentence of the paragraph.  Specifically, how can one
> objectively measure/determine/test "expertise" of an
> organization or individual in WCAG2.0 requirements, and how
> is this relevant?  Wouldn't it suffice for providers of
> externally provided techniques to document exactly how
> satisfaction of such techniques (via testing) would meet
> applicable WCAG2.0 requirements according to these providers,
> without regard for measuring their "expertise"?
>
> Thanks and best wishes
> Tim Boland NIST
>
>
>   Quoting Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>:
>
> > I have an action
> >
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/12/07-wai-wcag-minutes.html#action03>
> > to propose a reword of the paragraph on sufficient
> techniques in the
> > Conformance proposals introduction
> >
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/01/conformance-revs#conformance>. Here
> > is my proposed rewording for the paragraph beginning "For
> each success
> > criterion, there is a list of techniques deemed by the
> Working Group
> > to be sufficient to meet the requirement." Michael
> >
> >     For each success criterion, there is a list of
> techniques deemed by
> >     the Working Group to be sufficient to meet the
> requirement. For each
> >     sufficient technique, there is a test to determine whether the
> >     technique has been successfully implemented. If the
> test(s) for a
> >     "sufficient" technique (or combination of techniques)
> are passed,
> >     then that success criterion has been met. It is not necessary to
> >     pass all tests for all techniques, only for at least
> one sufficient
> >     technique per success criterion. It is also not
> necessary to meet
> >     the requirements of the success criterion using the techniques
> >     identified as sufficient in the documentation provided by the
> >     working group. There may be other techniques, which are not
> >     documented by the working group, that would also meet
> the success
> >     criterion. When using such externally provided
> techniques to meet
> >     WCAG requirements, it is important that they be created and
> >     documented by individuals or organizations who are expert in the
> >     requirements of WCAG 2.0.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Michael Cooper
> > Web Accessibility Specialist
> > World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative E-mail
> > cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org> Information Page
> > <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 8 February 2007 06:27:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:49 GMT