W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2000

RE: A Proposal To Not Establish "Minimal Requirements" - Response to D Poehlman's comments

From: Hansen, Eric <ehansen@ets.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:16:40 -0400
To: "'w3c-wai-ua@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Message-id: <A12997152E36D31187A4000077893CFB036FC3AF@rosnt46.ets.org>
David Poehlman wrote:

"the document further expresses but perhaps not clearly enough that the
minimum req is over arching and not necessarily all inclusive of meeting the
checkpoint.  think of it as  a guide to the techniques document if you

Eric now writes:

I agree that the process of looking for minimal requirements is important; I
just would not like to see them as a separate category of normative
requirement that competes with or undercuts the checkpoints themselves.

I think that it would actually be hard (and hazardous) to define what we
mean by minimum requirement and how that differs from the checkpoint itself.
By establishing minimal requirements that are separate from the checkpoint
statements themselves, one would would make things fuzzy by providing two
answers to the question: "How does one satisfy a checkpoint?":
Answer 1: By conforming to the checkpoint statement.
Answer 2: By conforming to the minimal requirement of te checkpoint.

Which is the correct answer?

In my view the best solution is that the checkpoint statement itself
captures, insofar as is practical, the minimal requirement, so that there is
only one answer to the question instead of (confusingly) two answers.

I like the suggestion that I think you are making when you refer to minimal
requirements as being a guide to techniques. I expect that some of what we
are identifying as minimal requirements should end up in the techniques as
possible -- and even encouraged, but not mandated -- ways of satisfying the

Eric G. Hansen, Ph.D.
Development Scientist
Educational Testing Service
ETS 12-R
Princeton, NJ 08541
609-734-5615 (Voice)
E-mail: ehansen@ets.org
(W) 609-734-5615 (Voice)
FAX 609-734-1090
Received on Friday, 23 June 2000 12:18:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:27 UTC