Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Draft of April 2006

Dear Gregg Vanderheiden ,

Thank you for your comments on the 2006 Last Call Working Draft of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/). We appreciate the
interest that you have taken in these guidelines.

We apologize for the delay in getting back to you. We received many
constructive comments, and sometimes addressing one issue would cause
us to revise wording covered by an earlier issue. We therefore waited
until all comments had been addressed before responding to commenters.

This message contains the comments you submitted and the resolutions
to your comments. Each comment includes a link to the archived copy of
your original comment on
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/, and may
also include links to the relevant changes in the updated WCAG 2.0
Public Working Draft at http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/.

PLEASE REVIEW the decisions  for the following comments and reply to
us by 7 June at public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org to say whether you are
satisfied with the decision taken. Note that this list is publicly
archived.

We also welcome your comments on the rest of the updated WCAG 2.0
Public Working Draft by 29 June 2007. We have revised the guidelines
and the accompanying documents substantially. A detailed summary of
issues, revisions, and rationales for changes is at
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/05/change-summary.html . Please see
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ for more information about the current review.

Thank you,

Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact

On behalf of the WCAG Working Group

----------------------------------------------------------
Comment 1:

Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/20060502171700.E4442BDA7@w3c4.w3.org
(Issue ID: LC-517)

Part of Item: Intent
Comment Type: ED
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):

In the GL list Wendy posted the following explaination that i think
would be good to add to the intent section to explain. John suggested
an edit which is also included.

Proposed Change:

WCAG 1.0 says "If you can't avoid building stairs, build an elevator."
It doesn't say anything about making the elevator easy to find or get
to. SC 4.2.1 of WCAG 2.0 says, "If you can't avoid building stairs,
provide an elevator at the main entrance, along with the stairs."

----------------------------
Response from Working Group:
----------------------------

Thank you for reminding us to include this important distinction. The
idea that "If you can't avoid building stairs, build an elevator." was
in WCAG 1.0. WCAG 2.0 wants to ensure that making the elevator easy to
find (or get to) is also important. SC 4.2.1 of WCAG 2.0 has been
updated to include, "The idea behind this success criterion is; "If
you can't avoid building stairs, provide an elevator that is just as
easily found."

----------------------------------------------------------
Comment 2:

Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/20060619060917.B717947BA1@mojo.w3.org
(Issue ID: LC-821)

Part of Item: Description
Comment Type: ED
Comment (including rationale for proposed change):

the title of this technique refers to
\"Placing a link to the transcript immediately next to the non-text content\"
However, a transcript is not sufficient here. It needs to be a \" full
multimedia text alternative including any interaction  \"

Proposed Change:

  Change \"transcript\" to   \" full multimedia text alternative
including any interaction  \"

----------------------------
Response from Working Group:
----------------------------

The title has been revised to read, "Placing a link to the full text
alternative for multimedia including any interaction immediately next
to the non-text content."

Received on Thursday, 17 May 2007 23:35:16 UTC