- From: Richards, Jan <jrichards@ocad.ca>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 21:28:21 +0000
- To: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Previous... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0069.html Authoring System Conformance (A, AA, AAA) "Partial" Component-Only Conformance (A, AA, AAA) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0071.html "Full" ATAG 2.0 Conformance (No-Level, A, AA, AAA) "Partial" Component-Only Conformance (No-Level, A, AA, AAA) On the Call... Authoring System Conformance Authoring Tool Conformance Full System Conformance Sub-System Conformance Unassisted Conformance Assisted Conformance After the Call.... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0082.html 1. "Full" ATAG 2.0 Conformance (A, AA, or AAA) 2. "Partial" Conformance (No-Level, A, AA, AAA) Other ideas welcome! Cheers, Jan > -----Original Message----- > From: Richards, Jan [mailto:jrichards@ocad.ca] > Sent: November 14, 2011 4:04 PM > To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org > Subject: Minutes from AUWG Teleconference on 14 Nov 2011 3:00pm-4:00pm > ET (TODAY) > > Minutes: > http://www.w3.org/2011/11/14-au-minutes.html > > Full text: > WAI AU > 14 Nov 2011 > > Agenda > > See also: IRC log > Attendees > > Present > Jeanne, +1.571.765.aaaa, Greg, Jan, Jutta, Alex, AlastairC, Cherie, > Tim_Boland, +1.561.582.aabb, Sueann > Regrets > Chair > Jutta Treviranus > Scribe > AlastairC > > Contents > > Topics > 1. Proposed conformance types: > Summary of Action Items > > 1. Proposed conformance types: > > <Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai- > au/2011OctDec/0071.html > > <Jan> JT: Note that not just full disclosure...also progress towards > confromance > > Jan: Agree that 'authoring tool' is problematic, but that is the name > of the guidelines! We've defined it to be the whole thing. > ... To change, we'd have to rename it to something bigger than the > whole document. > > AL: Perhaps need a term like authoring environent? Something along > those lines. > > <Jan> ATAG 2.0 System Conformance or > > <jeanne> +1 to the name change > > AL: 2 types: envinroment type, other is tool type. > > <Jan> ATAG 2.0 Environmet Conformance > > Jutta: other perspectives. Could have tool that only authors certain > type of content. That tool could be seen as full conformance. > > AL: Might need a matrix to define full conformance from a whole bunch > of things. > ... one axis: criteria, second axis: technologies. > > Jan: Easier to explain that a simple tool can be a system? > ... Note the astriks, noting the claim caveat. > > Jutta, at the moment, we have full and partial, but the distinction is > based on the accessible authoring features, but that isn't the wording > the first one. > > Jan: 1st one is end-to-end performance > ... I see, it is 'accessible content' rather than 'web content'. > > <Jan> - this conformance option *can* be chosen for authoring tools* > that require no additional components to meet ATAG 2.0. > > <Jan> - this conformance option *can* be chosen for authoring tools* > that require no additional tools to meet ATAG 2.0. > > Jeanne: Concerned with tools that only aspire to be focused. Having > some 'full' some 'partial', doesn't sound great, sets up a heirarchy. > > Jan: Partial in WCAG? > > AL: Best idea we could come up with at the time, it was created mostly > because system aggregators and user-gen content causes problems. > > Jan: So someone could make a really great checker tool, but a problem > elsewhere could mess it up. > ... Full level, just failed a couple of criteria, > > AC: How can you make a 'full' claim but not meet certain criteria, > wouldn't that be a partial claim. > > Jan: Sueann's example from VPAT: Say a tool is v accessible, but can't > be installed accessibly. > ... This text is going into the conformance levels area of the doc. > > AL: Another site meets WCAG 2.0 A, plus a few AA but not enough to > claim double A. They should be able to mark that down. > ... Never really A/AA/AAA, there are in-betweens. > > AC: Then why have partial? > > Jan: Partial - the "no"s are ignored in terms of conformance. > > Greg: Starting to segment tools by categories? > ... Two tier conformance, you've got tool makers who can, but then > you've got authors who can glue together different tools. > ... Create conformance claim as an author. > > AL: Authors don't have to make conformance claims. > > J: Wordpress is an example, will want to claim, but don't include a > checking and repair tool. > > AL: That's why we get rid of "partial" and use component. > > Jutta: Notion of ingrator/aggregator could pull tools together, how > would they construct such a claim? > > Jan: VPATs work by flowing through, they get it from developer, same > thing here. > > AC: Having no-level for Full conformance is ok if you have "component" > rather than "partial" conformance as the other level. > > <Jan> WHat about Full System Conformance vs. Sub-System Conformance? > > Jeanne: Need to be sensitive to people with tools that are missing > small parts of ATAG. > > AL: We wouldn't claim for a system, we'd claim for specific tools. > ... Why system vs sub? Why not system vs tools. > > Jan: Tools can be whole or a small part. > > J: 1 could be claimed by a very small tool, but because it meets all > the requirements it can claim full conformance. > ... 2 could be claimed by a large tool that covers every type of > content, but doesn't try to have checking and repair. > ... Pointing to size/complexity, rather than what accessible > conformance it makes. > > AL: Big systems wouldn't try for 1, just 2. > > J: Worried that size of the tool / system as opposed to the degree to > which it takes responsibility for accessible authoring practices. > > AL: Most tools out there don't intend to do everything. > > J: The largest thing is not always the thing that chooses to do all the > accessibility features. > ... 1. do it all yourself, where 'all' is differently defined. All may > not be a lot. > ... Suggesting 1 is 'system' and 2 'tool' conformance. But that implies > it isn't how much of the accessible authoring practices it involves. > ... What is really the distinction between 1 & 2, because it isn't > whether it's a system or a tool. > > AC: What about a workflow based differentiation? > > Jutta: accessible workflow. > > Jan: Let's hash out on the list. > > > > Cheers, > Jan > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richards, Jan > > Sent: November 14, 2011 11:21 AM > > To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org > > Subject: AUWG Teleconference on 14 Nov 2011 3:00pm-4:00pm ET (TODAY) > > > > here will be an AUWG teleconference on Monday 14 November 2011 at > 3:00 > > pm - 4:00 pm ET: > > > > Call: (617) 761-6200 ext. 2894# > > IRC: server: irc.w3.org, port: 6665, channel: #au > > > > If people think they will arrive more than 15 minutes late, please > send > > me an email beforehand. > > > > The dial-in numbers for Zakim are now ONLY: > > =========================================== > > +1.617.761.6200 (Boston) > > > > > > Editor Drafts: > > ============== > > ATAG: > > http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2011/ED-ATAG20-20111028/ > > Implementing ATAG: > > http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2011/ED-IMPLEMENTING-ATAG20-20111028/ > > Last Call comment responses: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0054.html > > > > > > Agenda: > > ======== > > > > 1. Proposed conformance types: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2011OctDec/0071.html > > > > NOTE: If you feel that substantive changes are required, it would be > > very helpful to send those to the list ahead of the meeting. > > > > > > Future meetings: > > ================ > > Nov 21: > > Nov 28: > > Nov 2011: Last Call WD > > Feb 2012: Candidate Recommendation > > - this is more speculative, since we are guessing how long we will be > > in CR > > June 2012: Proposed Recommendation > > August 2013: Recommendation > > > > > > (MR) JAN RICHARDS > > PROJECT MANAGER > > INCLUSIVE DESIGN RESEARCH CENTRE (IDRC) > > > > T 416 977 6000 x3957 > > F 416 977 9844 > > E jrichards@ocad.ca > > > > Twitter @OCAD > > Facebook www.facebook.com/OCADUniversity > > > > OCAD UNIVERSITY > > 100 McCaul Street, Toronto, Canada M5T 1W1 > > www.ocadu.ca > > >
Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 21:28:44 UTC