W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > April 2008

Re: ACTION-734 Proposal for Accessibility Docs (was FW: Agenda for BPWG call 2008-04-24)

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:21:54 +0200
Message-ID: <79cab0900804290521k4739fa5cqf10b6b052671ce71@mail.gmail.com>
To: "MWI BPWG Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>

2008/4/28 Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>:
>  As long as the comprehensive list of success criteria is listed in the
> "Nothing", "Something", "Everything" section, I favor restricting the list
> of "detailed" guidelines to success criteria of the "Something" category.
> The doc only makes sense with WCAG in one hand and MWBP in the other hand
> anyway, IMO, so no need to repeat these documents unnecessarily.

This sounds right, but there are occasions when there's nothing to do,
but there is still a comment. For example 1.4.1 [1] Use of Color,
there's nothing to do but there is a comment about how "the
accessibility guidelines specify the ways that color may be used". I
think this can be worked around in editing the document and making
some exceptions like putting a "something" list and then a brief
"Nothing, but beware" list. Or simply removing these comments if
they're not really useful, or promoting them to "something" status.



[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/restructure/v3_mwbp-wcag20.html#visual-audio-contrast-without-color

Alan Chuter,
Senior Web Accessibility Consultant, Technosite (www.technosite.es)
Researcher, Inredis Project (www.inredis.es/)
Email: achuter@technosite.es
Alternative email: achuter.technosite@yahoo.com
Blogs: www.blogger.com/profile/09119760634682340619
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2008 12:22:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:51 UTC