- From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:09:37 +0100
- To: Michael Stenitzer <stenitzer@wienfluss.net>, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
- CC: wai-eo-editors@w3.org, accessible media <office@accessible-media.at>
Hi Michael, Thank you for considering using a different list for a non-technical issue like the one below. However, since this comment relates to the WCAG 2.0 Last Call Working Draft, it should go through the WCAG WG commenting process (mailing list already included in this response). Greetings, Shadi Michael Stenitzer wrote: > > dear editors, > > The Austrian association "accessible media" has the following question > about the ongoing process for a WCAG 2.0 recommendation. > > What will be the expected process after publishing WCAG 2.0 as a > (candidate) recommendation? Do we have to wait for the availability of > lists for accessibility supported technologies? What approach will you > recommended for web developers until there are such lists of trustworthy > and/or official institutions available? Are there any known > organisations that are already preparing such lists? > > We see the risk that many institutions will ignore the requirement #5 of > a conformance claim, until such lists will be published together with > the guidelines or by a governmental body. > > Please elaborate the expected process in the WCAG 2.0 FAQs (or somewhere > else). > > best regards > michael stenitzer > -- Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ | WAI International Program Office Activity Lead | W3C Evaluation & Repair Tools Working Group Chair |
Received on Monday, 4 February 2008 19:09:47 UTC