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

Re: Inclusion of POUR in the Presentation - Re: WCAG 2.0 Presentation Comments

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 10:31:43 -0500
Message-ID: <46BB335F.4040604@w3.org>
To: Justin Thorp <juth@loc.gov>
Cc: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org

fyi: In the Yahoo presentation, I just briefly mentioned them in outlining the structural differences between 1 & 2: "In WCAG 1.0 we had guidelines and each guideline had checkpoints, that were priority 1, 2 and 3. With WCAG 2.0 we still have guidelines. We also have a level above that called Principles, the principles of accessibility. In short they are: make sure that your web content, your web site, is Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. You can go and read more about those. The principles organize the guidelines and gives us the basics. Then we have the guidelines, and then we have the success criteria..." - http://www.w3.org/WAI/highlights/200706wcag2pres

Justin Thorp wrote:
> I guess just thinking out loud (in email)... as a consumer of the guidelines, does the inclusion of POUR in WCAG 2.0 aid my understanding of the guidelines and the success criteria?  Does it affect the way that I implement my Web sites?
> 
> I'd have to say No.  As a developer, I see the guidelines as discrete criteria that I need to accomplish or maybe in terms of the Web technology that I'm using to implement them, like I have to get all of my techniques related to forms done.  
> 
> I don't think of them based on some higher level taxonomy, like "I have all of my P guidelines done. Now I just have to finish implementing O, U, and R."  Having them organized as POUR doesn't really help me at all.
> 
> I'm not saying that the POUR structure isn't important. But just in the course of 40 min presentation,  I'd think that you'd only wanna include the stuff that is going to lead your audience to your end goal.  Right?
> 
> For us, it's getting people more excited about WCAG 2.0.  POUR doesn't send me running to my blog to talk about how amazing the guidelines are, as opposed to some of the other things in the presentation which I think could get some people really excited.
> 
> I guess what I'm asking is, do we need to talk about POUR at all?
> 
> 
> ******************
> Justin Thorp
> US Library of Congress
> Web Services - Office of Strategic Initiatives
> e - juth@loc.gov
> p - 202/707-9541
> 
>>>> Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> 8/9/2007 10:04 AM >>>
> 
> 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"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 9 August 2007 15:33:20 UTC

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