Thoughts on "The relationship between MWBP and WCAG"

Relationship Between Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 and Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED
-mwbp-wcag-20080104/

1. Typo, in "How to use these documents"
"Of the five, you may find that only one will is of interest to you
depending on your current situation" change to "Of the five, you may
find that only one is of interest to you depending on your current
situation". 

2. Section "How to use these documents"
When I read the bullets starting "to accessibility" and "to the mobile
web" I get a bit confused. I looked up to the sentence preceding the
bulleted list to see if these were extensions of that sentence but they
weren't. Then, reading through the intro para and bullets I wondered if
they could be cut down. From

"This document is part of a suite describing the relationship between
WCAG and MWBP. There is a general introduction and five other documents.
Of the five, you may find that only one will is of interest to you
depending on your current situation. At the time of publication there is
one version of the MWBP and two versions of WCAG, version 2.0 being a
draft.

    * Overview (this document)
    * Both together: If you have not done either WCAG 2.0 or MWBP, then
read WCAG 2.0 and MWBP 1.0 together
    * to accessibility: If you have implemented MWBP 1.0 and are
considering doing:
          o WCAG 2.0, then read From Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 to
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0
          o WCAG 1.0, then read From Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 to
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
    * to the Mobile Web: If you are considering doing MWBP 1.0 and have
already done:
          o WCAG 2.0, then read From Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines 2.0 to Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0
          o WCAG 1.0 then read From Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
1.0 to Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0"

To

"This overview introduces a suite of five documents describing the
relationship between WCAG and MWBP. At the time of publication there is
one version of the MWBP and two versions of WCAG, version 2.0 being a
draft. Of the five, you may find that only one is of interest to you
depending on whether you are familiar with WCAG or MWBP. As such the
documents are have a number of different approaches:

    * WCAG 2.0 and MWBP: If you have not read either WCAG 2.0 or MWBP,
then read WCAG 2.0 and MWBP 1.0 together
    * From MWBP to WCAG: If you have implemented MWBP 1.0 and are
considering doing:
          o WCAG 2.0, then read From Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 to
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0
          o WCAG 1.0, then read From Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 to
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
    * From WCAG to MWBP: If you are considering doing MWBP 1.0 and have
already done:
          o WCAG 2.0, then read From Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines 2.0 to Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0
          o WCAG 1.0 then read From Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
1.0 to Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0

Notes on the above changes:
1. Shortened introductory sentence so that it is clearer and focuses
just on the 5 documents.
2. In the opening paragraph referenced the fact that the documents
represent different approaches depending on what you are familiar with.
3. Changed "to accessibility" and "to mobile web" at start of bullets to
"From MWBP to WCAG" and "From WCAG to the MWBP" respectively as it was
unclear what the start of the bullets meant. Also changed
"accessibility" to "WCAG" and "to mobile web" to "MWBP" as this is how
it is referred to in the headings for the documents.

3. Section "The problem with multiple overlapping requirements"
The first sentence explains WCAG as the abbreviation of the Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines: "Many Web sites have already adopted the Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines (hereinafter referred to as [WCAG]).
The explanation should go at the start of the document. Same issue
applies to MWBP in this paragraph, the abbreviation should be explained
at the start of the document.  u

4. Section "The problem with multiple overlapping requirements"
Text "In many cases compliance with WCAG is mandatory" does not specify
what the cases should be. Perhaps this could be changed to "In many
countries compliance with WCAG is mandatory".




---
Henny Swan
Senior Web Accessibility Consultant
RNIB Web Access Consultancy
T: 020 7391 2044
M: 07940 718434
E: Henny.Swan@rnib.org.uk
A: 105 Judd Street, London, WC1H 9NE
W: http://www.rnib.org.uk/wac

Need to know more about web accessibility? Then why not enrol on one of
our training courses at http://www.rnib.org.uk/webaccesstraining.

Also keep up to date with news in the world of accessibility in our blog
at http://www.rnib.org.uk/wacblog 


-- 
DISCLAIMER:

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be privileged.  If you are not the intended 
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the 
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the 
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it 
and any attachments from your system.

RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants.  However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any  such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and 
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk



This message has been scanned for viruses by BlackSpider MailControl - www.blackspider.com

Received on Friday, 11 January 2008 10:49:30 UTC