Re: Proposed minimal requirements of checkpoints 6.1, 8.1, 2.7, 8.2, and 8.3

The proposed minima for the others seem fine, but the 6.1 proposal seems a
little vague.

I think the pieces are to require all features identified as accessibility
related in a specification, as well as those identified in a WAI
specification (such as "accessibiltiy features of CSS"). This bascially works
in teh W3C specification world, and where languages are created by people who
specify them well. It leaves out other good references like those on Java
produced by IBM, and other similar cases, such as where one group produces an
XML language, and another group outside WAI produces a specification for
using it accessibly. Can we afford to do that? Does anyone have a way to
integrate them?

Charles McCN

On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Ian Jacobs wrote:

  Hello,
  
  Please consider for discussion the following proposed
  minimal requirements for these checkpoints (from the 10 
  June 2000 draft [1]):
  
  
  1) Checkpoint 6.1  Implement the accessibility features of supported 
                  specifications (markup languages, style sheet
                  languages, metadata languages, graphics formats, etc.). 
  
     Note: In UAAG 1.0, this is not a relative priority checkpoint.
           Therefore, it is P1 to implement all accessibility features. 
  
     Proposed Minimum:  If the specification or another document 
       indicates what features benefit accessibility, be sure to implement
       those. Implement those features that satisfy the requirements of 
       the three WAI guidelines. [Note that this is almost circular since
       checkpoint 6.1 is a requirement of UAAG 1.0. This means: if the
       spec refers to something that is addressed as an accessibility
  feature
       of a UA, implement it.]
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia

Received on Monday, 12 June 2000 18:36:15 UTC