W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2006

wcag 2.0 checklist - Re: EOWG: WCAG 2.0 Review and Agenda for 12 May 2006 Teleconference

From: Justin Thorp <justin@mycapitalweb.com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 01:41:34 -0400
Message-Id: <688476A7-B64F-422E-B991-4469D09857E0@mycapitalweb.com>
To: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Hi All,

I see the purpose of the checklist as being a quick easy way to  
simplify the document into something that you can just skim to make  
sure your web site is all there. From the checklist itself, I should  
be able to, for the most part, make sense of what I needed to  

For me,  the WCAG 1.0 checklist was really cool and really helpful.   
It simplifies the document very well.  I could look at the web site  
and look at the checklist and make sure that I had all of the parts  
that I needed (ie. images, forms, tables.)

I understand the necessity of having WCAG 2.0 being not technology  
specific but this makes just reading a list of the success criteria  
by themselves a whole lot less useful, at least for me as a  
developer.  It is less of practical items that I need to accomplish.

"2.4.4 Each link is programmatically associated with text from which  
its purpose can be determined"

That doesn't mean a whole lot to the me when making a web site, at  
least without having to sit and think about it.  Now when I have read  
the list of techniques and the "how to" part, I have a more practical  
idea of what needs to be accomplished.

I guess what I am saying is that I think the WCAG 2.0 checklist  
misses the point of being a checklist.

WCAG 2.0 is really awesome but part of my concern is that it is  
really huge.  As a developer, I could go through WCAG 1.0 and find  
the relevant information that I needed to make sure I had what I  
needed in my website.  It is all there in WCAG 2.0 in amazingly rich  
detail.  That amazingly rich detail is just so much information to  

This is just a total brain storm and granted its probably out of the  
scope for anything right now...it'd be cool to have a form where I  
could describe my web site and it would spit back all the parts of  
WCAG 2.0 that were applicable to my web site.  This would give me  
more of that practical checklist that I could drill down through to  
make sure that i got everything.

Another brainstorm and probably out of the scope of anything...I wish  
WCAG 2.0 was published in a book.  For me, I have no problem making  
sense of an article on the web but its different when its a large  
volume.  I know I have access to printers and binders but printing  
all of that out (WCAG 2.0, Understanding, Techniques) is just a lot.   
For me the printed page, when trying to go through that much  
information, is just easier to process.  I'd pay $20 bucks to buy a  
bound copy of WCAG 2.0.


On May 9, 2006, at 5:29 PM, Shawn Henry wrote:

> 3. Checklist for WCAG 2.0 / Appendix B: Checklist (Non-Normative)
> * http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/appendixB.html
> Focusing on:
> - Presentation, including grouping and color
> - Introduction: Does it place the document well within the context  
> of the other documents?

Received on Friday, 12 May 2006 05:42:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:39 UTC