W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > August 2004

WCAG 2.0

From: Alistair Garrison <alistair.garrison@accessinmind.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:22:45 +0200
Message-ID: <001401c48c06$a7aad660$0300a8c0@your0xv8v0oeap>
To: <public-comments-wcag20@w3.org>, "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>
Dear WCAG 2.0 Group, 

This is just a quick comment on the latest version of the WCAG 2.0 documents.

To me the most important thing for useful guidelines is useful techniques for implementing them.  To this end I would suggest that the 'Gateway' document should be removed so that there is no confusion when looking for information on how to implement a certain feature (a form, a table, an image, etc...) in a specified technology in an accessible way.

Additionally, I would suggest that the lower level sections in the Techniques documents (for images, image maps, etc...) be split again to show different techniques for satisfying different guideline levels.  Ideally, these documents should provide a reader, looking to implement a certain feature (a form, a table, an image, etc...) in a way that satisfies a certain level of the guidelines, with a clear example on how they might actually achieve that.

This format for techniques would also help the transition from WCAG 1.0 to 2.0, as I believe most people are just looking for the changes they need to the make to the code in order to satisfy the new Guidelines.  Although massive changes have been made to the format of the guidelines and the accessibility ratings ascribed to certain things, in reality (and for the majority of things) how you actually implement something in an accessible way changes little between versions.  For example, regardless of which guidelines you look at, you still need to add an alt attribute with a descriptive value for alt text to an image that conveys information for that image to be considered to have been implemented in an accessible way.

Finally, I would just like to add that I feel it would be beneficial for each W3C specification for a specific technology to be provided along with a section detailing the accessibility features that have been built in to that technology. This might allow an easier updating process for the techniques documents (with their focus then being shifted toward ensuring an accessible outcome when mixing technologies), and also lead developers who don't know about the WCAG guidelines towards implementing accessibility features.

Very Best Regards 


Alistair Garrison 
Director - Accessinmind Limited

Website: http://www.accessinmind.com

IMPORTANT: This e-mail, including any attachments, is for the addressee   
only.  It may contain privileged and/or confidential information.  If it   
has come to you in error, please notify the sender immediately.  If you   
are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy, print,   
distribute or rely on its contents.  All e-mails and any attachments are
believed, but not warranted, to be virus free.  However, all e-mails   
should be virus checked before being downloaded and we accept no  
responsibility therefore.       
Received on Friday, 27 August 2004 07:28:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:14:36 UTC