W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Sec. 508 vs. WAI

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 02:23:02 -0500
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>, Harry Woodrow <harrry@email.com>
Cc: "'Phill Jenkins'" <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, wai-wcag-editor@w3.org
Message-id: <002301c2f431$b4842850$6501a8c0@handsontech>

Yes, It is the job of the access board in this case to make their
law/standards clear.  OUr obligation begins and ends with appropriate
references to laws and standards which are required and where they are
required.  The more we work on comparing apples to oranges, the more we
dilute the quality of our fruit.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@sidar.org>
To: "Harry Woodrow" <harrry@email.com>
Cc: "'Phill Jenkins'" <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>;
<wai-wcag-editor@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: Sec. 508 vs. WAI



I don't think the Access Board's comparison is anywhere near as good as
Jim Thatcher's, and as noted in my response to this thread I don't
think that is perfect either.

I agree that it would be helpful if WAI published assesments of other
specifications in the same area, and how they compared (as well as the
access board several major companies have their own), preferably
joint-publishing agreed versions. But I don't think they have any
particular obligation (they are an independent organisation) and it is
an open question if this is the best use of resources - and how WAI
sets is priorities is a separate discussion.

The above is my personal opinon and not necessarily endorsed by La
Fundación Sidar. Same goes for anything I write that doesn't say it is
endorsed by someone...

cheers

Chaals

On Thursday, Mar 27, 2003, at 10:38 Australia/Melbourne, Harry Woodrow
wrote:

>
> Is it the role of the W3C to do this?  It seems to me that the two
> bodies produced different things. One a Recommendation on producing as
> fully accessible websites as possible and the other a specification for
> the purchasing of equipment and systems for a specific purchasing
> group.
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Phill Jenkins
>
> I would also publically ask that the W3C WAI publish their view of the
> differences between the Web part of the 508 technical standard and WCAG
> 1.0.  Better yet would be a joint document from both the Access Board
> and WAI that they both agree on.  I would recommend NOT including any
> discussion of the policy stuff, i.e., conformance vs compliance, since
> W3C does not really produce policy documents.
>
> What the Access-Board has published that Larry Hull quoted is an
> excellent start.  I also have an internal IBM version that I could
> contribute.  The Web Content Guidelines Working Group (GL) also needs
> to
> publish a comparison for the next public draft of WCAG 2.0
--
Charles McCathieNevile           charles@sidar.org
Fundación SIDAR                       http://www.sidar.org
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2003 02:23:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:08 GMT