W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2007

[includes question for EOWG] Re: WCAG 2.0 Presentation Comments

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 09:04:50 -0500
Message-ID: <46BB1F02.6030508@w3.org>
To: Justin Thorp <juth@loc.gov>, "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

Thanks for the input, Justin. Comments below, preceded with SLH:

Justin Thorp wrote:
> A few questions about the slide order....
> 
> Slide 15: More Precisely Testable
> Slide 16: WCAG 2.0  has principles
> Slide 17: The POUR Acronym
> Slide 18: WCAG 2.0 has Success Criteria
> Slide 19: Back to Testability
> 
> What does the structure of WCAG 2.0 (principles, success criteria) have to do with it being testable?
> 
> Instead of sticking slides 16-18 in the middle of testability, what about making it the first "What does WCAG 2.0 give you" point?  It could be, "The structure is easier to understand."  After you make that intro point, dive into the fact that WCAG 2.0 is testable.

SLH: I changed the slide order; however, I didn't put "The structure is easier to understand" as a "What WCAG 2.0 gives you" point, because I don't think that's very strong. HOWEVER, I would like to hear others' opinions on this.

NOTE: I'll upload a new version of the slides after I've made some other changes.

QUESTION for EOWG: Are the Principles a significant enough benefit to be the first point for "What WCAG 2.0 gives you", or should we just leave it as is, not categorized as "What WCAG 2.0 gives you"?

[end SLH]

> Slide 22: WCAG 2.0 is Flexible
> Slide 23: WCAG 2.0 is normative
> Slide 24: Techniques are informative
> Slide 25: WCAG 2.0 is Flexible.
> 
> I don't get what slide 23-24 have to do with WCAG 2.0 being more flexible.  
> 
> Is it because WCAG 2.0 is more high level and the implementation stuff is in the techniques that WCAG 2.0 (the normative document) can be applied to all technologies (slide 30)?

SLH: Read the Notes, which I've updated a bit:
- slide 22 "What WCAG 2 gives you": ...WCAG 2.0 is designed to be more adaptable and flexible, through different types of documents.
Let’s look at how the different WCAG 2.0 documents provide that flexibility, as well as provide both technology-independent@@neutral and specific guidance.
- slide 23 "WCAG 2.0": "WCAG 2.0 is not prescriptive about how to do things, but rather what functionality is needed for users. So WCAG 2.0 specifies what needs to be done for accessibility, and a related document tells how to do that. WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria are technology-independent@@neutral, and specific guidance is provided in the Techniques. Let’s look at how that provides flexibility.
- slide 24 Techniques: ...the Techniques document can be updated as technologies and new techniques are developed. That’s how WCAG 2.0 can provide a stable basis, with flexibility to adapt over time – through the Techniques.

Note that slide 30 ("WCAG 2.0 flexibility for different situations") covers a little different aspect -- the ability to use different technologies depending on the situation.

[end SLH]

> I thought flexibility meant that it gave developers more wiggle room for how they created their sites (like slide 26).

SLH: I was using multiple meanings of flexibility, including  flexibility for technology changes, and wiggle room for design, and the whole baseline/accessibility-supported technologies list.

Do you have suggestions for presenting this differently?

[end SLH]

> For slides 27-29, instead of just mentioning the fact that there is scripting techniques or information about WAI ARIA, can we mention what its going to do for people?  How is it going to make their lives easier?
> 
> For scripting techniques, it's going to fill this big gaping void where developers want to know "how do I make my javascript/ajaxy site more accessible?"  This is HUGE.  This would be a great one for the "Extensive supporting materials,practical implementation guidance" section.
> 
> For WAI ARIA, how does it fit into the message of WCAG 2.0?

SLH: Added these notes to the Notes sections to flesh out.

~Shawn
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2007 14:06:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:41 UTC