- From: Liddy Nevile <liddy@sunriseresearch.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 09:45:13 +1000
- To: public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org
This is a response to the comments made about my issue with WCAG 2.0 wrt metadata. Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/20060614003228.646BD33205@kearny.w3.org (Issue ID: LC-799) Unfortunately, I did not provide a detailed issue report and I suspect my comments have been misunderstood by the WG. A new ISO standard for accessibility metadata, known as the AccessforAll metadata and also worked on by IMS GLC, the European community, the Dublin Core community, and others, makes it possible to significantly improve the accessibility of the Web by adding appropriate, standardised metadata to resources. This metadata is carefully designed to completely avoid any ideas of 'conformance' and simply advise on the characteristics of the resource that may be of relevance to the INDIVIDUAL user. This means that an individual can determine if the resource is suitable for them, regardless of its conformance to any standards. It also makes it possible for systems that take account of individual user's needs and preferences and makes it possible for such systems to discover versions of resources that will suit the individual user. The metadata being proposed is necessary for individual selection of appropriate resources, does not have any impact on conformance and therefore is not likely to cause many of the problems that conformance metadata might, and has been designed to work as part of the general accessibility approach taken by WCAG, in full recognition of WCAG. It should be noted that there is nothing technology-specific about the metadata schemas being recommended and such metadata is fully extensible and works for both generic and proprietary technologies. It is fairly clear that if metadata of the type suggested is included in the WCAG requirements, many more people with accessibility needs and preferences will be able to use many more resources of use to them, making the Web in general, far more accessible. I urge the WG to consider this work in more detail and at least to discuss it with one of the editors of the AccessforAll metadata standards. I personally consider that to not include metadata of this type in WCAG would be a retrograde step and continue the problem with WCAG that the new metadata approach was designed to overcome: while conformance with WCAG is a good practice and helps deal with the bulk of problems for many people, WCAG does not and cannot cater for the specific needs and preferences of an individual user who needs to know if the resource has what they need and prefer, whatever else it does or does not have for other people. I note that although the new metadata approach was developed for education, it is generally applicable, and is so considered by the Dublin Core metadata community. For further details, please see: http://www.imsglobal.org/accessibility (a number of documents available) http://jtc1sc36.org/doc/36N1141.pdf (a nearly final version of the standard to be released very soon by ISO) http://dublincore.org/groups/access (a generalised approach to AccessforAll metadata) Liddy
Received on Sunday, 20 May 2007 02:57:14 UTC