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

Re: Issue 324: Proposal for revised checkpoint 6.2

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 10:28:24 -0500
Message-ID: <3A4B5C18.869EE163@w3.org>
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Jon Gunderson wrote:
> 
> Ian,
> I like the new checkpoint.  How do you feel about making the requirement to
> conform to WCAG 1.0 at a P2 requirement.  I would use the same argument for
> P2 as the group used to make documentation conformance a P2 level.

I would object to that. Here are some reasons:

 - I'm not convinced you can create a document that 
   conforms to WCAG 1.0 at Level Double-A with plain text.
   For instance, you might fail 3.3: use style sheets to
   control layout and presentation. Or 3.6: Mark up lists
   and list items properly. Or most importantly, 11.1:
   Use w3c technologies when they are available and 
   appropriate for a task and use the latest versions when
   supported.

   This means that Notepad couldn't conform to UAAG 1.0
   if it only supports plain text viewing.

 - By imposing a P2 requirement here, were are in effect saying
   that all content on the Web must be level Double-A conformant.
   Otherwise, no user agent will be able to conform to UAAG 1.0.
   I don't believe we should impose that restriction on authors
   or user agent developers.

 - Ian
 

> At 01:50 PM 12/27/2000 -0500, Ian Jacobs wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >Per my action from the 16 November face-to-face meeting [1],
> >please consider this proposed change to checkpoint 6.2.
> >
> > >From the 23 October draft [2]:
> >
> >   6.2 Use and conform to W3C Recommendations when they are
> >       available and appropriate for a task. [Priority 2]
> >
> >       Note: For instance, for markup, conform to HTML 4 [HTML4], XHTML
> >       1.0 [XHTML10], or XML 1.0 [XML]. For style sheets, conform to
> >       CSS ([CSS1], [CSS2]). For mathematics, conform to MathML
> >       [MATHML]. For synchronized multimedia, implement SMIL 1.0
> >       [SMIL]. For information about programmatic access to HTML and
> >       XML content, refer to guideline 5. User agents may conform to
> >       other specifications in addition to those required by this
> >       checkpoint. For reasons of backward compatibility, user agents
> >       should continue to implement deprecated features of
> >       specifications. Information about deprecated language features
> >       is generally part of the language's specification.
> >
> >The discussion points at the face-to-face meeting were
> >the following:
> >
> >1) It's a P2 issue to implement W3C specifications, or if
> >    you don't, implement formats that allow conformance to
> >    WCAG 1.0 (at any level of conformance).
> >
> >2) It's a P2 issue to conform to a spec, not just
> >    to implement it incompletely.
> >
> >3) It's important to support deprecated features, but
> >    this will not a requirement of UAAG 1.0 (per our resolution).
> >
> >4) It's important to implement the latest version,
> >    but developers should consider supporting the version that
> >    has the latest accessibility features. [This is for Techniques]
> >
> >5) One reviewer requested a clearer statement of
> >    what "available" means.
> >
> >Putting these together:
> >
> ><NEW>
> >   6.2 Use and conform to either (1) W3C Recommendations when they are
> >       available and appropriate for a task, or (2) non-W3C
> >       specifications that enable the creation of content that
> >       conforms to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
> >       [WCAG10] at any conformance level. [Priority 2]
> >
> >       Note: For instance, for markup, conform to HTML 4 [HTML4], XHTML
> >       1.0 [XHTML10], or XML 1.0 [XML]. For style sheets, conform to
> >       CSS ([CSS1], [CSS2]). For mathematics, conform to MathML
> >       [MATHML]. For synchronized multimedia, implement SMIL 1.0
> >       [SMIL]. A specification is considered "available" if it is
> >       published (e.g., as a W3C Recommendation) in time for
> >       integration into a user agent's development cycle.
> ></NEW>
> >
> >For the techniques (in addition to other points):
> >
> >1) For reasons of backward compatibility, user agents should continue
> >to implement deprecated features of specifications. Information about
> >deprecated language features is generally part of the language's
> >specification.
> >
> >2) If more than one version or level of a specification is appropriate
> >for a particular task, user agents are encouraged to conform to the
> >latest version. However, developers should consider implementing the
> >version that best supports accessibility, even if this is not the
> >latest version.
> >
> >  - Ian
> >
> >[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2000/11/minutes-20001116#issue-324
> >[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-UAAG10-20001023/
> >
> >--
> >Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> >Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
> >Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
> 
> Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
> Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
> Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
> MC-574
> College of Applied Life Studies
> University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
> 1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL  61820
> 
> Voice: (217) 244-5870
> Fax: (217) 333-0248
> 
> E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
> 
> WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
> WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua

-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Thursday, 28 December 2000 10:28:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:22 GMT