- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 23:06:21 +1000
- To: "Giorgio Brajnik" <giorgio@dimi.uniud.it>, shadi@w3.org
- Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:33:13 +1000, Giorgio Brajnik <giorgio@dimi.uniud.it> wrote: > I agree, of course. > One detail: Judy (in a private communication) mentioned that we probably > need to devise a new logo, as the old one is already in place in some > many website that it is unreasonable to ask people to provide an earl > report to justify its posting. I don't agree with this. While it would be unreasonable to force everybody to do this, I don't think it hurts to ask. Formally the copyright conditions laid down by W3C mean that it is a breach of copyright to us the label without having assessed conformance to the relevant level. Ths is not actively policed in any way, and it would be nice to see W3C make some minimal effort to ensure that the label actually means what they claim. (For example on CSSZengarden it apparently means "follow this link to find out how to check whether this page meets a conformance level" and NOT "this page meets the triple-A conformance level of WCAG", which is a flagrant breach of the conditions of use). Asking people to back the logos with EARL seems like something that strikes a reasonable balance between not causing grief to people who think they are doing the right thing, and trying to ensure that the label is useful enough tothe user comunity that people will take notice of it for any real decision-making. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Fundacion Sidar charles@sidar.org +61 409 134 136 http://www.sidar.org
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2005 13:06:38 UTC