Re: [Minutes] BAD TF teleconference on 28 October 2008

Hi, Shadi and all --

I've taken a quick look at what it will take to upgrade
the BAD evaluation report to WCAG 2.0. We're certainly
covering as many of the success criteria as we were
of the 1.0 checkpoints. The work will be in documentation.

I've attached a snippet of HTML to show one possible
approach (just section 5.1 of the report). The main idea
here is to leave the basic format alone; I don't see any
reason to re-invent the wheel. I'd like to discuss this
in our meeting Wednesday, however, before proceeding.

The conformance matrix (section 4) will obviously need to
be changed to use success criteria instead of checkpoints.
I'm wondering if any of the automated tools mentioned in
paragraph 3.2 (Methodology) have been upgraded to check
WCAG 2.0? I know that at least one vendor was working on
this, but haven't heard from them recently.

One minor suggestion on the report page: in my sample,
I've added a bit of padding to the table cells -- this
makes it easier even for fully-sighted readers to use,
and can especially help those with low vision or
dyslexia. There might be similar changes we could make
elsewhere in the style sheet.

Talk to you Wednesday,

Tom