Requirements

According to our charter we are going to write an explanantion  of what needs
to happen with ATAG. That can include a Proposed Recommendation, hence the
work on the new draft, but it really should include a more formal statement
of the issues we are trying to resolve with that draft.

As I recall they are the following:

1. The nature of the requirement for pormpting was a subject of debate. It
  was not necessarily clear whether a tool had to interrupt workflow at any
  point in order to conform to checkpoints

2. There is some redundancy in existing checkpoints

3. We need a draft that is ready to incorporate WCAG 2.0 as soon as that is a
  Recommendation.
    (this is a big one. Essentially that means we need to be able to develop
      techniques for that and get it through Candidate Recommendation as fast
      as possible, and part of that involves ironing out any bugs we can find
      in ATAG 1)

4. It would be helpful to clarify which relative priority chekpoints apply to
  all WCAG checkpoints, and which only apply to some.

5. It is not always clear what level of implementation is required and what
  is suggested by a checkpoint

If people raise an issue with the document, particularly if it leads to a
proposed change to Wombat (or has already), please add to this list. We will
need to publish this as a document in order to ask the Director for
permission to publish a first working draft of Wombat.

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)

Received on Monday, 17 September 2001 15:48:00 UTC