W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > October 2002

Re: use of Priority vs Conformance Levels

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 20:00:24 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org


Here is a very useful and quite brief reference for the WCAG20 topic (issue 
#101).  It is a summary of the requirements, and by implication some of the 
reasons, behind WCAG20.


If you read nothing else in preparing for Issue #101, please read 
this.  Some of the requirements clearly are similar to things that we are 
(or ought to be) considering.  Some are purely WCAG specific.

I found a copy of it on my laptop.  As I don't have network connection as I 
write this, I can't say whether the "Latest Version" is any newer, at



At 10:17 AM 10/2/2002 +0900, you wrote:

>On Fri, Sep 27, 2002, Lofton Henderson wrote:
> > But it would be good to understand the why and what of WAI's new approach
> > here, and either confirm or modify our own approach.
> >
> > Do you want to pursue #1 below ("why")?
>I'm currently having a look at WCAG2 (even though I don't think I'll have
>time for a full evaluation wrt SpecGL), I think I'll get in touch with
>the WCAG group and discuss this with them.
>One interesting thing I have already noticed is the big difference in
>the checkpoints between v1 and 2:
>Much fewer checkpoints, much more concise, no example whatsoever (all
>moved to the examples documents, etc).
>One issue raised in this document states:
>"In many cases, several WCAG 1.0 checkpoints of varying priority levels
>map to a single WCAG 2.0 checkpoint. How should we resolve the
>difference? Could this imply that we only prioritize at the
>technology-specific level?"
>Note that their approach for GL/ET has changed too, they now use three
>levels: [ http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#how-to ]
>1 - Top layer - Overview of Design Principles, Guidelines, Checkpoints
>2 - Technology-specific Checklists
>3 - Bottom layer - Technology-specific application information
>What I find really interesting is that 2) and 3) are not big documents
>including examples and techniques from different sources, but rather
>bindings for/to specific technologies. Something worth discussing too?
>Olivier Thereaux - W3C
>http://www.w3.org/People/olivier | http://yoda.zoy.org
Received on Monday, 7 October 2002 20:38:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:28 UTC