- From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 15:39:18 -0400
- To: "List (WAI-AUWG)" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
From: Barry Feigenbaum <feigenba@us.ibm.com> I brought this up at the Austin Face-to-face and again recently. As implementing all the ATAG 2.0 guidelines, even in a minimal way, may prove to be too expensive/time consuming for all tool vendors, we need a way for authoring tools to get credit for conformance to parts of ATAG without total conformance (i.e., get "partial credit"). This would encourage tool vendors to try to conform where they can without having to climb such a steep hill for the full breath of compliance. I propose that this be done based on individual guidelines (we don't want to get to granular at a formal conformance level). The tool can claim support of ATAG in total at some level (A, AA, AAA) if it supports all guidelines at the matching level (all guidelines met at the claimed level) and/or individual guidelines of ATAG (i.e., each ATAG guideline will be like a separate spec to conform to). IMHO many vendors will stress guideline 2, then guideline 1; both of which have great value to the industry. Guidelines 3 & 4 will get less priority. Example A: Guideline Claimed Conformance Level (can use ATAG Guideline Conformance Icons) 1 Tool accessible AA 2 Produce accessible content AAA 3 Support author A 4 Promote accessible solutions NC (nonconforming) The above tool could not claim ATAG 2.0 conformance but it could claim ATAG 2.0 GL1 and 2 with advanced conformance (IMHO still a pretty good achievement) Example B: Guideline Claimed Conformance Level (can use ATAG Guideline Conformance Icons) 1 Tool accessible A 2 Produce accessible content AAA 3 Support author A 4 Promote accessible solutions A The above tool could claim full ATAG 2.0 conformance and can also claim ATAG 2.0 GL 2 with AAA and 1, 3 and 4 with A conformance. Both of the above tools can use the ATAG 2.0 icons (we will need ones for each guideline) in tier product literature. Individual tools may also state that they support individual checkpoints or even individual success criteria on their website/literature, but this is not included in an AUWG sanctioned format. Barry A. Feigenbaum, Ph. D. Worldwide Accessibility Center - IBM Research www.ibm.com/able, w3.austin.ibm.com/~snsinfo voice 512-838-4763/tl678-4763 fax 512-838-9367/0330 cell 512-799-9182 feigenba@us.ibm.com Mailstop 904/5F-021 11400 Burnet Rd., Austin TX 78758 W3C AUWG Representative IBM Club Representative IEB Member Sun Certified Java Programmer, Developer & Architect IBM Certified XML Developer; OOAD w/UML This message sent with 100% recycled electrons
Received on Friday, 8 April 2005 19:39:55 UTC