- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:06:24 +0200
- To: "Loretta Guarino Reid" <lorettaguarino@google.com>
- Cc: public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org
On Fri, 18 May 2007 01:28:47 +0200, Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com> wrote: > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Comment 5: > > Source: > http://www.w3.org/mid/op.tbjxeqrswxe0ny@researchsft.myhome.westell.com > (Issue ID: LC-1309) > > The guidelines place in level 3 very many of the requirements necessary > to help people with cognitive and reading disabilities access the web. > Since only 50% of level 3 requirements (as chosen by content authors) > need to be met in order to claim confomance to the guidelines, it is > quite possible to conform to the guidelines at triple-A level while > doing very little (and clearly not enough) to address the needs of > these user groups. > > I propose either that this be explicitly and clearly explained in the > introductory and conformance sections, or that the levels system be > reworked as per my lat call comment on them. > > cheers > > Chaals > > ---------------------------- > Response from Working Group: > ---------------------------- > > We have changed the definition of Triple-A conformance so that all > level AAA success criteria must be satisfied. > > We have added language to the Introduction, the Conformance section, > and the Quick Reference to highlight the fact that WCAG 2 only > addresses some of the needs of people with cognitive, learning, and > language disabilities, and to call out the need for more research in > this area. WAI is exploring ways in which to support and encourage > work in this important area. > > In addition, we have added some best practices for cognitive, > learning, and language disabilities as advisory techniques, and we > have proposed 3 new success criteria in this area. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- While it is a shame that the guidelines do not cover such an important group, I recognise that including advisory techniqes is a big step forward. Removing the ability to claim conformance based on meeting arbitrarily selected criteria, while ignoring others, satisfies the initial comment - thank you. Cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk chaals@opera.com Catch up: Speed Dial http://opera.com
Received on Monday, 11 June 2007 11:06:36 UTC