W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2004

RE: WCAG 2.0 draft

From: Scarlett Julian (ED) <Julian.Scarlett@sheffield.gov.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 13:37:36 -0000
Message-ID: <F9BE3B1AB649D311A573009027852E4D047CBC98@EDUC_MXS>
To: "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>


[update]
just come across and _internal_ draft document dated 01/03/1004 which contains sections dealing with the issue of conformance levels of accessibility. 

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/

My guess is that the 27 October draft I quoted below is also an internal one. Maybe an indication on the actual document of what is internal and what is stable and public might be a good idea.

J.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scarlett Julian (ED) [mailto:Julian.Scarlett@sheffield.gov.uk]
> Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 8:32 AM
> To: 'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'
> Subject: WCAG 2.0 draft
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if this has been raised before but I have just been 
> looking at the latest working draft for WCAG 2.0 and noticed 
> a significant change between the 24 June 2003 and 27 October 
> 2003 versions. In the former there are explicit references to 
> a system of prioritisation for checkpoints that make it 
> possible to 'rate' the accessibility of a site in a way that 
> is currently possible with WCAG 1.0. However, in the October 
> version these appear to have been removed. 
> 
> Working in local government I have a legal obligation to 
> provide priority 2 pages as a minimum but I see no way that 
> the latest WCAG 2 draft provides a grading system that can be 
> see as an equivalent. I guess that those having to develop to 
> 508 standards will have similar questions.
> 
> 
> J.
> 
> Julian Scarlett
> Education Web Officer
> Sheffield City Council
> 
> 
> The information in this email is confidential. The contents 
> may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the 
> addressee.  If you are not the addressee, please tell us by 
> using the reply facility in your email software as soon as 
> possible. Sheffield City Council cannot accept any 
> responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this 
> message as it has been transmitted over a public network.  If 
> you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or 
> amended please tell us as soon as possible.
> 

The information in this email is confidential. The contents may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee.  If you are not the addressee, please tell us by using the reply facility in your email software as soon as possible. Sheffield City Council cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a public network.  If you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or amended please tell us as soon as possible.
Received on Monday, 8 March 2004 08:40:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:31 UTC