W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: Standards Harmonisation

From: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 01:35:10 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040507013320.04f8a2a8@localhost>
To: Andrew.Arch@visionaustralia.org.au
Cc: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

Andrew,

Sorry, I received these change requests after completing and sending out a 
copy-edited version of the document over the EOWG list. We can discuss 
these on the EOWG call.

You might want to look at the copy-edited version to see if any of your 
comments might change.

Thanks for your comments.

- Judy


At 01:47 PM 5/7/2004 +1000, Andrew.Arch@visionaustralia.org.au wrote:

>Hello Judy/All,
>
>I have sent a few copy-edit suggestions to EO-Editors, but include some
>suggestions for new material and restructure here:
>
>1. Organisations:
>
>Suggest an additional para (to become para 2) talking about minimum levels
>of accessibility aimed for by multi-region/multi-jurisdiction organisations
>because they face different and/or conflicting standards, rather than
>aiming for a higher level of accessibility that would be practical if they
>only faced one standard.
>
>2. Browsers etc
>
>2.1 Suggest an additional paragraph along the lines of:
>"adopting structural markup and W3C (technical) standards will
>drive/encourage assistive technology developers to reveal more semantic
>information to users of these technologies"
>- currently this section has Assistive Technology in the heading, but not
>in the text.
>
>2.2 Can we expand the "Browsers etc" section to include Evaluation Tools?
>If so, then I suggest moving the first para and the three dot points for
>"Fragmentation" to the end of the "Browsers etc" section.
>
>3. Fragmentation
>
>3.1 If we adopted my suggestion 2.2 (above), then the remaining material is
>really about myths - suggest a changed heading to "Myths Regarding
>Harmonisation"
>
>3.2 Suggestion for the last para that starts "For organizations that have
>already developed ..." along the lines of:
>
>Governments and organisations that have already developed their own
>accessibility guidelines should:
># consider becoming involved in one of the WAI working groups to ensure
>that their needs are heard within W3C
># monitor the development of future versions of the W3C accessibility
>guidelines and actively comment on the public drafts
># redirect their localisation energies into ensuring adoption of
>international standards by authoring and evaluation tool developers ( and
>getting local translations of these tools?), and website developers and
>publishers
># look to becoming involved in W3C's authorised translation program
># develop a process for updating local policies and standards to harmonise
>with the next releases of the W3C international accessibility guidelines
>
>4. Action Steps
>
>4.1 Paragraph one talks about WCAG 2.0 - what about mentioning ATAG 2.0?
>
>4.2 Suggest an extra dot point along the lines of
>"more demand on user agents (and assistive technologies?) to reveal and
>provide access to the semantic and accessibility aspects of web pages"
>
>4.3 What about a dot point about translations?
>
>Regards, Andrew
>
>
>_________________________________
>Dr Andrew Arch
>Manager Online Accessibility Consulting
>National Information & Library Service, Australia
>Ph 613 9864 9222; Fax 613 9864 9210; Mobile 0438 755 565
>http://www.nils.org.au/ | http://www.it-test.com.au/ |
>http://www.ozewai.org/
>
>Member, Education & Outreach Working Group,
>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/
>
>NILS - A Joint Venture between the
>Royal Victorian Institute for the Blind, The Royal Blind Society of NSW,
>and Vision Australia Foundation.

-- 
Judy Brewer    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
MIT/CSAIL Building 32-G530
32 Vassar Street
Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA
Received on Friday, 7 May 2004 01:39:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:51 UTC