W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: [Proposal] New Guideline 6 checkpoints (APIs, Infoset, DOM)

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 10:53:27 -0400
Message-ID: <3CE90DE7.40207@w3.org>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> By and large i like this. The only reservation I have on re-reading it (this
> doesn't represent a changed part of the checkpoints is whether the note for
> checkpoint 6.9 (was a note on checkpoint 6.8 in the old version) means that a
> partial or partially invalid implementation of CSS can claim that the
> checkpoint is not applicable.

In UAAG 1.0 we use "conform to" and "implement" carefully. In
general, our "conform to" checkpoints are P2 and our "implement"
checkpoints are P1.

I think that UAAG 1.0 is not going to be able to solve the general
problem of determining whether entity E conforms to spec S.

But yes, conformance is required.

  _ Ian


-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
Received on Monday, 20 May 2002 10:55:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:51:07 GMT