W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-wcag-editor@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Request modification for WCAG 1.0 Errata

From: Wendy Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 17:05:36 -0400
Message-ID: <4294E8A0.5080307@w3.org>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, wai-wcag-editor@w3.org, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org, John Slatin <John_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>

Hello,

It seems that we have already included this proposed language in WCAG 
1.0 Errata. Please refer to item 5 at [1]. It says, "Description (and 
correction). The note for Checkpoint 3.3 should say something about the 
effect of proportional sizing on raster images as follows: "Use relative 
rather than absolute units in markup language attribute values and style 
sheet property values. [Priority 2] For example, in CSS, use 'em' or 
percentage lengths rather than 'pt' or 'cm', which are absolute units. 
If absolute units are used, validate that the rendered content is usable 
(refer to the section on validation). For example, do not proportionally 
size raster images." 

This is very close to the proposed language below.  Am I missing a 
nuance or does this entry cover your concern?

Thank you,
--wendy

[1] <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WAI-WEBCONTENT-ERRATA>
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

>
> I would like to second this request, and note that it is in fact 
> repeating  a request I made (when I was just a random ousider) some 
> time ago.
>
> It is important that this erratum is considered for WCAG 1.0, because 
> the  situation in many countries is that that is the relevant 
> standard. The  long delays in WCAG 2.0 being finished, and the failure 
> to provide any  ongoing support for WCAG 1 in the meantime, are 
> leading to increased  fragmentation in the practical application of 
> WCAG, and to reduced trust  in WCAG as a reliable basis for 
> accessibility.
>
> med vennlig hilsen
>
> Charles
>
> On Thu, 19 May 2005 09:48:28 +0200, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG  
> <rscano@iwa-italy.org> wrote:
>
>> So what I suggest is to modify the actual errata like this:
>>
>> Description (and correction). The note for Checkpoint 3.4 should say
>> something about the effect of proportional sizing on raster images as
>> follows: "Use relative rather than absolute units in markup language
>> attribute values and style sheet property values. [Priority 2] For
>> example, in CSS, use 'em' or percentage lengths rather than 'pt' or 'cm'
>> or 'px' (Pixel is relative to the viewing device), which are absolute
>> units.
>> If absolute units are used, validate that the rendered content is usable
>> (refer to the section on validation). For example, do not proportionally
>> size raster images."
>>
>> Or find another solution but that clearly define about pixel usage. This
>> is important for low-vision people and for the correct law application
>> (and for future laws in Europe, due that eEurope project ask to refer to
>> WCAG 1.0).
>
>
>


-- 
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
http://www.w3.org/WAI/
/--
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2005 21:06:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:04 UTC