RE: Glossary terms related to conformance

As I indicated in my survey answer (extract below), although accessibility supported does not occur in an SC, it does appear in a Note to an SC.

""accessibility supported" appears in our Note 1 to 3.1.1 (Language of Page). At first sight we do not need to say how it applies in the ICT context as we use it with exactly the same meaning as that described under [WCAG 2.0] "Important terms". Unfortunately the [WCAG 2.0] glossary entry [for accessibility supported] talks of "Web content technology" and the notes are very Web specific. So, as with every other glossary entry, we need to say how the definition should be read for documents and software - and this means that we need to propose an alternative for "Web content technology" (which is also the last item in the proposed list of terms to ignore)."

So I do not see how we can just avoid clarifying what we mean when we say "accessibility supported" as it cannot be identical to the WCAG 2.0 glossary text (even though the intended meaning may be the same).

Once we start to look at the guidance we need to write to help people understand "accessibility supported" in non-Web contexts we come across two of the other terms (conformance, Web content technology) in the list appear.

I have also highlighted in my survey comment that we use "conforming alternate version" in another of our notes, but that it may be easy to solve as we use it with exactly the same meaning as WCAG 2.0. We may only need to write "This applies directly as written, and as described in the WCAG 2.0 glossary."

Loïc indicates in his survey comment why "satisfies a success criterion" is an issue (we use the concept in many places in our document even though we do not use the exact words).

Best regards

Mike

From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu]
Sent: 01 May 2013 13:07
To: Michael Pluke
Cc: Andrea Snow-Weaver; public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org
Subject: Re: Glossary terms related to conformance

I remember the discussion

but I did a search for these terms and did not find them anywhere in any of the success criteria.

I know it says

"some terms that were blocked by the conformance discussion actually are used in WCAG outside of the conformance section

but where do you see these terms used in and SC?

I did word searches and couldn't fine them anywhere in the SC.

not sure where that sentence came from.

Can you help me?



Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info
Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project -  http://GPII.net

On May 1, 2013, at 6:16 AM, Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com<mailto:Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>> wrote:


Hi Gregg

I think you may have forgotten the discussion last week on this topic.

Loïc and I identified that these terms appear in many places in our draft (see the answers in the surveyhttps://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/glossary6/results ) and also the text in the minutes that summarize the brief discussion we had on that topic:

"some terms that were blocked by the conformance discussion actually are used in WCAG outside of the conformance section

Keep action-94 open and Andi will come back with another proposal next week"

So I fear that we cannot escape addressing all of these terms (see also my email that suggests how we can deal with "conformance" as well as some suggestions to help with how we address accessibility supported).

Best regards

Mike

From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu<http://trace.wisc.edu>]
Sent: 01 May 2013 11:50
To: Andrea Snow-Weaver
Cc: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org<mailto:public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Glossary terms related to conformance

Not a problem

none of these terms are used in any SC

G



Accessibility Supports  NOT REFERENCED FROM ANY SC --  only used in the conformance section .  So you don't need to address it.

Conformance is also only used in conformance section
            the word does appear in a NOTE on 4 SC  (but these are only forward references -- that point out that these SC are treated specially in the conformance section.

 *   2.3.1 Three Flashes or Below Threshold
 *   2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide:
 *   2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap:
 *   1.4.2 Audio Control:

conforming alternate version   NOT REFERENCED FROM ANY SC --  only used in the conformance section .

satisfies a success criterion    NOT REFERENCED FROM ANY SC --  only used in the conformance section .

technology    NOT REFERENCED FROM ANY SC --  only used in the conformance section .   (the word Assistive technology is used several times - but we defined that)



Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info
Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project -  http://GPII.net

On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:42 PM, Andrea Snow-Weaver <asnowweaver@gmail.com<mailto:asnowweaver@gmail.com>> wrote:



I am working on proposals for the glossary terms that we deferred from last week.

accessibility supported
conformance
conforming alternate version
satisfies a success criterion
technology (web content)

These terms were previously blocked until we dealt with conformance. Last week I had proposed that we not comment on these terms but it was pointed out that even though these terms are fundamental to conformance, they are sometimes referenced from the success criteria.

I'm stumbling over the first one - accessibility supported.

I can think of replacement terms for "web content technology" in the definition itself. But Notes 2, 3, and 4 are about conformance or conformance claims which we have agreed we won't be commenting on.

Does anyone have thoughts on how we deal with these notes about conformance given that WCAG2ICT is not a standard that something can conform to?

Andi