Re: Conformance question

Responses in JRG:
JRG: You may want to provide a link to the conformance discussion in your
issue list.  I am sure that many companies during proposed recommendation
will want to review the discussion that lead to this group decision.  Since
it is a potential hot button issue during proposed recommendation you may
also want to outline the different options the group considered, the
process that was used to reach consensus and why group reached this
consensus.  You may also want to include references or statements from the
developers participating in the working group that they felt that this was
a resonable conclusion.

At 12:40 PM 9/21/99 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>This has been discussed at length in the group. The most recent occasion it
>was brought up was the Working group meeting on 1 September, where the
>suggestion of doing something similar (providing a vconformance that did not
>require meeting the checkpoints in what is now guideline 7) was rejected.
>
>Although this has been a difficult issue for the group, I think a fair
>summary of the working consensus is that a tool which conforms to the
>Accessibility Guidelines must be accessible, and until that goal is reached
>the tool in question is merely good for some aspects of accessibility (in the
>same way that a tool which is accessible in itself, but leads the author to
>produce inaccessible content, or prevents the author from producing
>accessible content, should not be able to claim conformance).

JRG: Again I think the two types of conformance just gives more detail on
what are the authoring tools capabilities and gives developers a chance to
focus their resources on shorter term compliance while they learn more
about the other type of conformance.  Sometimes smaller carrots are easier
to chew that one big carrot.  As a person who would like to have
able-bodied instructors on campus use tools that support accessible markup,
I would like to see the two types of conformance.  Since it may take a long
time for many tool developers to make their tools more accessible to
assistive technologies and build in accessibility features.  I think you
also need to stengthen the checkpoints in guideline 7.  I would recommend
adding a checkpoint related to supporting the keyboard for all functionalities.



>
>Regards
>
>Charles McCN
>
>On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>
>  You only have one type of conformance listed in the document.  I know there
>  was discussion a few months ago related to the issues of the authoring tool
>  being accessible and producing accessible content.  It was brought to the
>  attention of the coordination group.  
>  
>  I was wondering if there was any discussion about having two types of
>  conformance, instead of the one listed in the last call document? 
>  
>  Conformance types I was thinking of:
>  1. Conformance in creating accessible web content
>  2. Conformance for an accessible interface and compatibility with assistive
>  technology
>  
>  It seems to me that two levels would give developers more managable goals
>  to target their accessibility resources and highlight to consumers the
>  level and type of accessibility of authoring tools as developers increase
>  the accessibility of their product.  
>  
>  I checked the AU issue list to see how it was resolved, but there was no
>  reference to when or how the issue was resolved.
>  
>  Jon
>  
>  
>  Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
>  Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
>  Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
>  Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
>  University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
>  1207 S. Oak Street
>  Champaign, IL 61820
>  
>  Voice: 217-244-5870
>  Fax: 217-333-0248
>  E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
>  WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
>  		http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
>  		http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
>  
>
>--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
>phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
>MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA

Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
1207 S. Oak Street
Champaign, IL 61820

Voice: 217-244-5870
Fax: 217-333-0248
E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
WWW:	http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
		http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
		http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess

Received on Tuesday, 21 September 1999 13:28:58 UTC