- From: Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
- Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 20:34:10 +0200
- To: Alistair Garrison <alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com>
- Cc: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>, Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Hi Alistair, In the definition of 'conforming alternate version' http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#conforming-alternate-versiondef ...I read "Each version should be as conformant as possible." which to me strongly suggests that the (not fully conforming) default page should also be checked. Not to forget Conformance requirement 5 "Non-interference" which lists 4 SC and goes on to explain that (quote) "these Success Criteria need to be met for all content including content created using technologies that are not accessibility supported." http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-conf-req5-head From a user perspective (and examples given) it seems clear that the conforming alternate version serves as a crutch where some part of the content cannot be made to conform. This also means that the rest on the default page should conform as much as possible. For me this is a strong rationale to check this default page as well for SC that are *not* covered by the conforming alternate version, and not to skip it and just check the conforming alternate version. Any thoughts on this? As a final note, I have yet to encounter recently developed web content that is marked as conforming alternate version. Does anyone know of examples to look at? Best, Detlev On 21 May 2014, at 20:08, Alistair Garrison <alistair.j.garrison@gmail.com> wrote: > conforming alternate -- Detlev Fischer testkreis - das Accessibility-Team von feld.wald.wiese c/o feld.wald.wiese Thedestraße 2 22767 Hamburg Tel +49 (0)40 439 10 68-3 Mobil +49 (0)1577 170 73 84 Fax +49 (0)40 439 10 68-5 http://www.testkreis.de Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2014 18:34:33 UTC