W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > July 2007

Comment LC-1072

From: Gian Sampson-Wild <gian@tkh.com.au>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 01:04:40 +1000
To: "'Loretta Guarino Reid'" <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Cc: <public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005b01c7bfde$fcd9b700$b300a8c0@tkhcomputer>

Comment 49:

Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/001f01c695f9$31b504e0$9288b23a@tkhcomputer
(Issue ID: LC-1072)

Advisory techniques: There should not be any advisory techniques unless they
are linked to a particular SC. Having advisory techniques linked to a GL
only, means that the level (A, AA or AAA) is not specified.

Proposed Change:

Move all GL advisory techniques to specific SC

Response from Working Group:

Because WCAG 2.0 success criteria are written as testable statements, it  is
not always possible to associate techniques that are difficult to test or
subjective in nature with success criterion. However, the working group
feels that it is important to make these technqiues available for authors
who are interested in improving the accessibility of their content beyond
the minimum conformance requirements. Note that regardless of association
with a success criterion or guideline, whether an author chooses to
implement advisory technqiues does not impact the level of conformance
Response from GSW:
Advisory techniques are not testable - that's why they are advisory.
Therefore there should be no problem in associated advisory techniques with
a particular SC and therefore a particular level.
Received on Friday, 6 July 2007 15:04:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 17 October 2017 07:46:01 UTC