WCAG 2.0 Comments

Hello, 

I don't think there is any point in addressing specific issues with the WCAG 2.0 since there are so many and I have problems with the overall concept of the WCAG 2.0. 

I will limit myself to agreeing with Brian Kelly's suggestions (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2006Jun/0143.html) to:
o Withdraw WCAG 2.0 
o Produce an errata for WCAG 1.0 

WCAG 1.0 is outdated and needs some corrections but overall it is a useful document. WCAG 2.0 could not be further removed from what web developers/authors need. 
It would have been nice to have a different approach than the one used in WCAG 1.0 - e.g. a truly easy-to-use and accessible web site rather than a set of hyperlinked documents. However, WCAG 2.0 has not addressed the issues web developers had with WCAG 1.0, nor has it built upon the strengths of WCAG 1.0. 

During the drafting of WCAG 2.0 many routes have been explored but the result is so far off the track (vague, difficult to understand, hard to navigate) that I think it will be impossible for web developers to apply the guidelines. Many web developers will give up on web accessibility or be confused and as a result, fewer web sites will be accessible. 
I hope the WCAG WG can take into account the concerns so many of us have been expressing.

Best regards,

Catherine

Disclaimer: The comments above represent the personal opinion of the sender; they do not necessarily represent the University's viewpoint.


Dr. Catherine M. Brys - PhD Eng
Library Web Services Co-Ordinator
- Library Web Site Accessibility and Usability Project - 
Glasgow University Library, Hillhead Street, Glasgow, G12 8QE, Scotland, UK
e: c.brys [at] lib.gla.ac.uk
t: +44 (0)141 330 6748
w: www.lib.gla.ac.uk/accessible