- From: Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 10:46:14 -0700
- To: "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <50688566.8060500@oracle.com>
Hi gang, One of the major issues left for us to tackle is WCAG 2.0 conformance, and what it means in the non-web ICT context. To help us, I've put together two pages on our wiki: * Conformance <https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/conformance> which excerpts all mentions of "conformance" from our Work Statement <http://www.w3.org/2012/04/WCAG2ICT-WorkStatement.html>, and * Peter's Conformance Proposal <https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/conformance/peterconformanceproposal> which encapsulates my thoughts on how we should approach & address conformance in our work (and which I've also summarized on the main Conformance <https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/conformance> page) Briefly, my own thoughts are: * Unlike what our Work Statement tells us to do with the individual SCs, we've been given a bit more latitude in figuring out how to address conformance. The most key quote for me to illustrate this difference is (with emphasis in /*boldface italics*/): "The resulting Working Group Note will include a success-criteria-by-success-criteria discussion of applying WCAG 2.0 to non-Web ICT, including their interface components and platforms, */and the extent to which /**/WCAG Conformance <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#conformance>/**/is meaningful to non-Web ICT./*" * Therefore, I believe we should do at least two things, and ideally four things (all quotes in the list below come from our Work Statement): 1. *Evaluate* "what WCAG Conformance means in the context of non-Web ICT" and *decide* "the extent to which WCAG 2.0 Conformance is meaningful to non-Web ICT" 2. Should we decide that WCAG 2.0 Conformance is meaningful, we should then *describe* "what WCAG 2.0 Conformance means in the context of non-Web ICT" 3. We might also *consider *whether our description should recognize/incorporate any of the ideas coming out of EvalTF related to an SC-by-SC analysis of the extent to which non-web ICT (particularly software) meets or fails to meet the SC. 4. We might also explicitly *describe *the challenges we find in applying WCAG 2.0 Conformance to non-web ICT in our published document To that end, in Peter's Conformance Proposal <https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/conformance/peterconformanceproposal> I have created 3 sections: The first section describes the challenges I've found in applying WCAG 2.0 Conformance to non-web ICT. I invite the Task Force to comment on these challenges - did I miss any? Am I overstating any of them? The section section attempts to answer the question "Is Conformance meaning for non-Web, non-embedded Content?" (e.g. what we used to call "electronic documents"). My conclusion here is that WCAG 2.0 Conformance should be pretty applicable here. The third & final section attempts to answer the closely related question, "Is Conformance meaningful for non-Web software?" Here my conclusion is different - I don't think that the strict "all or nothing" approach of WCAG 2.0 Conformance makes sense for non-web software (and as I know from my work on the WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/eval-tf>, there are many challenges in applying WCAG 2.0 Conformance to web applications as well). Instead, I suggest that what might instead be meaningful is an SC-by-SC analysis and report on the extent to which non-web software is found to meet each SC (which seems to be where the WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/eval-tf> is also headed, as can be seen from the September 20 public draft of their Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/> document). Thoughts? Regards, Peter -- Oracle <http://www.oracle.com> Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal Phone: +1 650 5069522 <tel:+1%20650%205069522> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2012 17:46:55 UTC