- From: Joshue O Connor <joconnor@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 12:20:09 +0100
- To: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, "public-rqtf@w3.org" <public-rqtf@w3.org>
On 26/08/2019 15:50, White, Jason J wrote: > A possible approach to organization of at least the requirements aspect of the document would be to review the Functional Performance Statements in EN 301 549. (There are somewhat similar, parallel statements in the U.S. section 508/section 255 regulations). One thing to add is that there are also generic functional accessibility requirements a la EN 301 549 that could be applicable for XR. [1] So (as far as my understanding goes) functional and performance (non-functional) requirements are differentiated by 'what needs to be done to make a system work for a user in situation x', vs 'how the system should behave in situation x'. We'll need to discuss these distinctions and see if mirroring this approach is beneficial. HTH Josh [1] http://mandate376.standards.eu/standard/technical-requirements?functional_statements=20&functional_statements_submitted=true -- Emerging Web Technology Specialist/Accessibility (WAI/W3C)
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 2019 11:20:15 UTC