Re: Group common failures as well as (good) techniques

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 1:59 AM, WCAG 2.0 Comment Form <nobody@w3.org> wrote:

>
>
> Name: Johannes Koch
> Email: johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de
> Affiliation: Fraunhofer FIT
> Document: TD
> Item Number: (none selected)
> Part of Item: Description
> Comment Type: general comment
> Summary of Issue: Group common failures as well as (good) techniques
> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
> I wondered why the common failures in the techniques document are not
> grouped as the (good) techniques are. They could be FG for general failures,
> FH for HTML/XHTML failures, etc.
>
> Proposed Change:
> Maybe rename the failures, or, at least, group them according to
> technology.
>
> ================================
 Response from the Working Group
================================

The working group felt it was important to raise the visibility of all
failures.  In particular, authors need to be aware of general failures as
well as failures specific to the technology they are using. So all failures
are listed together.

However, we will consider including information that more clearly associates
failures with the technologies they relate to in future versions of the
Techniques document.

Could you let us know by Monday, December 8 whether you are satisfied with
our resolution? If that date is not possible, please reply to this message
indicating when you will be able to respond.

If we do not hear from you by Monday, December 8, we will assume that
you are satisfied with the responses to your comments.

Thanks again for the interest that you have taken in these guidelines.

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