W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: Usefulness of compliance section in Web Accessible Mobile document

From: Sean Owen <srowen@google.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:40:41 -0500
Message-ID: <e920a71c0802190640s45295c6la82d879361b227a@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jo Rabin" <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Cc: "Phil Archer" <parcher@icra.org>, "MWI BPWG Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>, EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>

To be sure we're answering the same question -- seems like the
question was not whether following BPs or mobileOK improves your
compliance with WCAG, but whether we should have a notion of what is
recommended, beyond what is necessary for compliance, with Best
Practices. My assertion is that Best Practices can include all these
elements and that there is no notion of compliance with BPs. Some
subset of what is in BPs will be translated into mobileOK, for which
there is a clear notion of compliance. Done.

On Feb 19, 2008 7:33 AM, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:
> >From our reading of the document over the last couple of BP meetings it
> seems that there is a very substantial number that are noted as
> improving accessibility, though they don't improve your prospects of
> compliance. The overall conclusion I draw is that following Mobile Web
> Best Practice in general improves accessibility and to some more limited
> extent improves your chances of conformance. So like Phil, I agree that
> this should be spelled out.
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 14:40:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:42 UTC