W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2000

RE: Is AAA Onerous?

From: Larry G. Hull <Larry.G.Hull@gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 12:00:35 -0500
Message-Id: <a05010405b667dc918485@[]>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

Sharon Laskowski from the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) speaking at the Government Services Administration 
(GSA) sponsored "Meeting the 508 Mandate - Today and in the Future" 
October 16 made an interesting point that seems apt here.

Following the presentations Ms. Laskowski was asked why she used the 
terms "conform" and "conformance" where the other speakers followed 
common usage and used the terms "comply" and "compliance", as in the 
phase, "in compliance with Section 508." According to my notes, she 
replied, "Compliance has no legal definition."

I personally hold that standards are by definition objective and can 
not require subjective judgment else they cease to become standards. 
(more or less Kynn's view) Without objective measure there is no way 
to determine compliance.

However, guidelines are not (necessarily) standards. I apply the 
Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE) explanation 
of the terms "standards" and "guidelines" that was drilled into me 
many, many years ago. One is required to follow (conform) to 
standards whereas guidelines capture best practices and are not 
mandatory however any departure from a guideline should be carefully 
weighed. (more or less Charles' view)


Larry (speaking for himself and only only for himself)

>Discussion between Charles F. Munat and Kynn Bartlett omitted to 
>save bandwidth
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2000 12:00:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:10 UTC