WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission

Name: Shawn Henry
Email: shawn@w3.org
Affiliation: W3C WAI
Document: UW
Item Number: (none selected)
Part of Item: Intent
Comment Type: general comment
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
It would be extremely useful to have an easy way to refer to specific guidelines and success criteria. Trying to refer to them by numbers or their long text is awkward. More importantly, it is a significant barrier to common Web developers being able to communicate about them, and it makes the guidelines even more esoteric.

I propose including “shortnames” or “handles” in the “Understanding” doc. I understand that it is quite difficult to do. I think it is OK for them to not be technically accurate, and instead make them easy and use common terminology, e.g.,:

- “Alt-text” for “Guideline 1.1 : Provide text alternatives for all non-text content”

- “Multimedia alternatives” for “Guideline 1.2 : Provide synchronized alternatives for multimedia”

- “Separate content and presentation” for “Guideline 1.3 : Ensure that information and structure can be separated from presentation”

- “Contrast” for “Guideline 1.4 : Make it easy to distinguish foreground information from its background”

I understand the concerns with shortnames/handles being used inappropriately; however, I think the benefits far outweigh the risks.

Also, I think that putting these in the “Understanding” doc and not the /TR/WCAG10 doc helps some with concerns about them not being insufficient to convey the full meaning of the long text.

Proposed Change:
Include shortnames/handles for each guideline and success criteria (and principle while you’re at it since those are easy :).

Received on Thursday, 22 June 2006 22:13:00 UTC