- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 13:16:02 -0700
- To: "Makoto Ueki" <makoto.ueki@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:32 AM, WCAG 2.0 Comment Form <nobody@w3.org> wrote: > > > Name: Makoto Ueki > Email: makoto.ueki@gmail.com > Affiliation: JIS Working Group > Document: W2 > Item Number: Appendix A: Glossary > Part of Item: > Comment Type: question > Summary of Issue: Note 5 in "conforming alternate version" > Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change): > It is difficult for us to interpret Note 5. > > Did Note 5 want to say that the conforming alternative version may be located on the other website which is outside of the scope of conformance? > > Proposed Change: > Need clarification for translation. > > ================================ Response from the Working Group ================================ Your interpretation of this note is correct. If, for example, you included a high resolution photograph of a handwritten historical document on a page on your site and you referenced a conforming alternate version located on another site that included an HTML version of the document you had photographed, you would still be able to claim conformance for the original page. We are modifying the note as follows: Note 5: The conforming alternative version does not need to reside within the scope of conformance, or even on the same Web site, as long as it is as freely available as the non-conforming version. 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
Received on Friday, 3 October 2008 20:16:44 UTC