- From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:16:06 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "'L. David Baron'" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
L. David Baron wrote: > David, to be perfectly clear these are my opinions only, and I do not speak for WAI explicitly - any more than you would speak on behalf of Mozilla. We know and understand the 'party line' but we do not define it. OK? > > I'd like to further understand the definition of contradict here: > > (1) Does HTML5 contradict WCAG if it removes a feature whose use > is recommended or required by WCAG? (I'm pretty sure the answer > to this one is yes.) Yes, and this is the partial case with @summary today. Ian's Draft Spec says: "Authors should not specify the summary attribute on table elements." [ http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#warnings-for-obsolete-but-confo rming-features ] WAI's WCAG 2 says: "Use (Using) the summary attribute of the table element to give an overview of data tables" [ http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/H73 ] (note: Ian suggests that the @summary attribute be obsolete but conforming - HTML5's closest thing to deprecated - but then actively contradicts WCAG with the above noted guidance) > > (2) Does HTML5 contradict WCAG if it improves a feature whose use > is recommended or required by WCAG, and the improvement makes what > is required / recommended by WCAG no longer conforming? Can you provide an illustration/example here? I cannot see how making something better would at the same time make it non-conforming. (Improving the taste of Diet Pepsi does not make it any less "diet" does it?) > > (3) Does HTML5 contradict WCAG if it improves a feature whose use > is recommended or required by WCAG, but the improvement leaves > what is required / recommended by WCAG as conforming? I would see that as a win/win, so no > > (4) Does HTML5 contradict WCAG if it adds a new accessibility > feature whose use is not recommended or required by WCAG? No, and I would urge that those new features be highlighted to the WCAG WG, with a request to consider incorporating into the WCAG guidance. This is not about stifling advances in technology any more than it is "accessible websites must be boring" - it is simply not true! I welcome these advances, be they ARIA work, or work in SVG that ensures that the visual aspect of what is rendered can also be conveyed in other ways. But work *with* WAI / WCAG to promote these new features, not against or outside of WAI / WCAG, something that apparently is not happening enough, as witnessed by: "Authors should not specify the summary attribute on table elements." JF
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 17:16:46 UTC