W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > April 2005

Proposal re: AI-20050411-1

From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:37:27 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20050414083134.022fed30@mailserver.nist.gov>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Hi, I had an action item from April 11 QAWG call:
AI-20050411-1 - "Tim Draft wording for "Beyond Conformance" section".
My text (a new (sub)section 3.3 for the "Beyond Conformance" section
of "Editor's Version" of SpecGL) is following.

Thanks and best wishes,
Tim Boland NIST

--------------------------------------------------------------

"3.3 Address Accessibility, Internationalization, and Device Independence


Accessibility of a specification must be encouraged by the Working Group, so
that a specification is available to anyone. The benefit of
addressing accessibility in a specification is the increased likelihood
that a specification can be accessed by everyone regardless of disability.
The Working Group should designate an individual
to monitor accessibility of a specification at the earliest possible point
of specification development, so that classes of products
defined in a specification will implement the accessibility features of
a specification from the beginning. Otherwise, it make take several
revisions before software addresses accessibility features, leaving
people with disabilities behind. Furthermore, when the review of
support of a specification for accessibility occurs, accessibility
will be adequately addressed in a specification. Formalizing the position 
of the
Working Group on accessibility by a clearly defined section and prose in a 
specification
removes ambiguities for specification users about the possibility
of addressing accessibility. For accessibility of XML-based vocabularies
defined in a specification, refer to the XML Accessibility Guidelines[1].
For other information about specification accessibility, refer to the
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
[2].


Similarly, the Working Group should support "internationalization" of a 
specification to the maximum extent possible and appropriate. The benefit 
of addressing "internationalization" in a specification is to ensure that 
the formats and protocols defined in a specification do not create barriers 
for languages, writing systems, character codes, and other local 
conventions employed by specification users. The Working Group should 
designate an individual
to monitor "internationalization" of a specification at the earliest 
possible point
of specification development, so that classes of products defined in a 
specification will implement the "internationalization" features of a 
specification from the beginning, and so that when the review of support of 
a specification for "internationalization" occurs, "internationalization"
will be adequately addressed in a specification. Formalizing the position 
of the
Working Group on "interationalization" by a clearly defined section and
prose removes ambiguities for specification users about the possibility of 
addressing
"internationalization". For information on interoperable text manipulation 
for text
defined in a specification, refer to the Character Model for the World Wide 
Web[3]. For other information about specification "internationalization", 
refer to the W3C Internationalization (I18N)
Activity[4].


Finally, a specification of a Working Group should support device
independence to the maximum extent possible and appropriate, to provide
diversity of interaction with a specification by people. The benefit of
addressing device independence in a specification is the increased
likelihood that a specification can be accessed from any device,
in any context by anyone. The Working Group should designate an individual
to monitor device independence of a specification, so that
classes of products defined in a specification
will implement the device independence features of
a specification from the beginning, and so that when the review of
support of a specification for device independence occurs, device independence
will be adequately addressed in a specification. Formalizing the position 
of the
Working Group by a clearly defined section and prose removes ambiguities
for specification users about the possibility of addressing
device independence. For information about
specification device independence, refer to the W3C Device Independence
Summary [5].


Examples:
(to be completed)

Resources:
[1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/XAG
[2]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/
[3]: http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/
[4]: http://www.w3.org/International/
[5]: http://www.w3.org/2001/di/
"
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2005 12:38:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:20 GMT