Re: Hello!

Hi Liddy,

I'm delighted to see you on the mailing list.

I've just been back to the charter and I can see that it is not as clear as 
perhaps it should be that accessibility is a very important issue for us. 
The first of the use cases talks about WAI compliance but it would have been 
better, with hindsight, if it had said "complies with the following WCAG 
Guidelines and is therefore WAI AA" or whatever.

The key use cases we see for the XG are (in no particular order:
mobileOk
Accessibility
Child protection
Quality labels/trust marks
DRM

Paul, who replied earlier, runs a company that does accessibility testing so 
it ain't going off the agenda.

Phil.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Walsh, Segala" <paul@segala.com>
To: "'Liddy Nevile'" <liddy@sunriseresearch.org>; <public-xg-wcl@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 9:44 AM
Subject: RE: Hello!


>
> Hi Liddy,
>
> You are absolutely right. We saw Web accessibility as a primary use case,
> it's actually documented in the Charter [1]. It would be great to get your
> feedback, I'd particularly like to hear from you when you apply content
> labelling to your own accessible websites.
>
> To further your thought process, don't you think content labelling makes
> accessibility more appealing by using the benefit of search indexing? 
> Search
> engines and browsers in the near future could highlight websites deemed to
> be 'trustworthy' using a Content Label. By labelling content you increase
> your chances of your site being highlighted in new versions of search
> engines and browsers that look for such labels.
>
> Using accessibility as an example, if a user can view only sites which 
> allow
> text to be resized to the 'largest' browser setting, a Content Label will
> distinguish sites with this ability. Users may even filter out websites 
> that
> are not labelled for this functionality in the future.
>
> This would permit companies to make declarations about conformance to
> individual WAI accessibility guidelines without the restrictive 
> requirement
> to meet the complete list of claims required for WAI Single-A, Double-A or
> Treble-A conformance. Equally you could state conformance to those sets if
> you choose.
>
> This would make content labelling suitable for sites in a gradual process 
> of
> converting to accessibility, as well as very large sites in which it would
> be impossible or wasteful to try to make every page accessible in one go.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/wcl/wcl-charter-20060208
>
> Thanks,
> Paul
>
> -----
> www.segala.com
>
>
>
>
>      -----Original Message-----
>      From: public-xg-wcl-request@w3.org
>      [mailto:public-xg-wcl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Liddy Nevile
>      Sent: 10 February 2006 05:30
>      To: public-xg-wcl@w3.org
>      Subject: Hello!
>
>
>      I am interested in this activity because I think it has
>      another use case, as I think I suggested to Phil some time ago?
>
>      I think that the person with accessibility needs and
>      preferences, for whatever reason, might also fit into
>      this work? I am co-author of the proposed ISO standard
>      that relates to the use of a profile of personal needs
>      and preferences (functional requirements) and the
>      resource description that is needed for a resource to be
>      matched to a user's profile. This is not just about the
>      group of people with disabilities who are, of course, in
>      need of accessibility, but anyone with a need at the
>      time, for whatever reason. Primarily, I have seen our
>      work as the metadata extension of PICS in the same way
>      that I think you are seeing it, but in a different context.
>
>      Liddy
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 10 February 2006 16:30:20 UTC