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

LC-1213 accept w/comment Re: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call...]

From: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:46:07 -0400
Message-Id: <p06110413c2a21bf9b9ed@[]>
To: public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org

At 4:27 PM -0700 17 05 2007, Loretta Guarino Reid wrote:
>Comment 44:
>Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/p06110403c0bf326d6713@[]
>(Issue ID: LC-1213)
>The wide-open nature of the baseline means that the obvious
>interpretation of the W3C Candidate Recommendation phase could never
>be completed because there would be other baseline profiles that
>remained un-demonstrated.
>Proposed Change:
>Spell out an explicit experiment plan for Candidate Recommendation.
>Define the baselines to be used to demonstrate the effectiveness of
>these guidelines.
>Make PR [a.k.a. CR exit] contingent on demonstrating the joint
>statistical distribution of the proposed testable hypotheses and user
>success in using live contemporary web content.
>Response from Working Group:
>We will be working with the W3C to define exit criteria for the
>Candidate Recommendation phase that are appropriate for the WCAG 2.0
>guidelines. Formal experimental design of this type is beyond the
>scope of the Working Group's charter.

It is inappropriate for you to be legalistic about the Charter and creative
about Candidate Recommendation.  You need to keep your options open
in framing effective measures of the "likelihood of adoption" of the
provisions set forth here.  If a demonstration of effetiveness is the
most telling evidence, don't rule it out.

On the other hand, this is commenting on the comments, does not affect
the document contents.  Hence "accept with..."

Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 00:46:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:14:44 UTC