Re: Proposed Text for Section 1.3 (was Re: Meeting tomorrow)


     My understanding from Phill Jenkins and Judy Brewer is that a U.S.
government section 508 working group is planning on requiring web tools to
be level AA compliant according to this ATAG document to be approved for
purchase when under U.S. government contract.  This will go into effect
sometime in 2000.  I believe (someone correct if I'm wrong, please) that
there won't be many, or possibly any non-trivial tools available by then at
that level of compliance.  Judy Brewer originally suggested this caveat as
a way to make clear that the ATAG document is meant to be used to compare
authoring tools, not as a way to "rule out" tools from purchase.

     I'm sure my wording is not the best, but can be used as a starting

-- Bruce

"Gregory J. Rosmaita" <> on 11/24/99 12:30:19 PM

cc:   Authoring Tools Guidelines List <>

Subject:  Proposed Text for Section 1.3 (was Re: Meeting tomorrow)

aloha, bruce!

could you please clarify your request,

1) Add text to section 1.3 that states something like:  "this document is
meant to provide direction for tool vendors and, given the state of
authoring tools currently, should not be used by regulatory bodies to
specify conformance levels until appropriate".

why do you consider this caveat necessary?  what is to be gained by its
insertion into ATAG?

why should ATAG be tied to such a time-dependency, when its contents have
been carefully crafted so as to be as time-independent as possible?

why is it quote inappropriate unquote?  when will it become quote
appropriate unquote for a regulatory body to specify conformance levels
based on the ATAG?

good luck with the move -- i know from recent personal experience how
trying a move can be!
He that lives on Hope, dies farting
     -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1763
Gregory J. Rosmaita <>
   WebMaster and Minister of Propaganda, VICUG NYC

Received on Wednesday, 24 November 1999 22:19:09 UTC