- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:41:57 +0300
- To: "RUST Randal" <RRust@covansys.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:16:58 -0400, RUST Randal <RRust@COVANSYS.com> wrote: > >> But if WCAG is being looked for by governments as a way of >> measuring accessibility, it is the user experience they must >> measure - not the level of access. > Are you seriously suggesting that governments need to create guidelines > for determining and measuring usability? And that the W3C should develop > the guidelines upon which those governments should base their > requirements? Governments do this all the time. THey don't just say "you need a wheelchair ramp", they say at what angle it can be, how wide it has to be, how much space you need to turn around. They say things about how many steps you can have between a landing, and how big the steps have to be. Most of the time they don't say a thing about colour, because it doesn't matter. But every so often there is a case where they do. There are laws about font sizes in documents (for example, if your conditions of use are displayed at less than 10 point in the state of New South Wales, they cannot be held to be binding on anyone supposed to read them - so all you folks whose sites have 9.6pt small print, take note). In other words, most laws tend to be about outcomes for people, not about ticking boxes. Lawyers are experts in how to interpret things in these terms to suit their argument of the day. Judges are experts in interpreting these things to ensure that the collection of interpretations is consistent and sensible. Technical experts provide the information that can be used for this interpretation. Why would there be a different approach to the web? cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile charles@sidar.org Fundación Sidar http://www.sidar.org
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2004 14:42:31 UTC