- From: <Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:40:31 +0200
- To: <wed@csulb.edu>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Agree. >-----Original Message----- >From: w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org >[mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of ext Wayne Dick >Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:40 PM >To: Gregg Vanderheiden >Cc: EOWG (E-mail) >Subject: Re: Using the terms "normative" and "informative" in >EO documents > > >Gregg's suggestion is probably the best of all. > >Wayne >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu> >To: "Shawn Henry" <shawn@w3.org> >Cc: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>; "Judy Brewer" ><jbrewer@w3.org> >Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 11:03 AM >Subject: Re: Using the terms "normative" and "informative" in >EO documents > > >> >> Personally, >> >> unless we are talking legal issues - I don't think they are >important. >> >> For most people these are 'guidelines' that can be followed >> >> those that NEED to know the difference - probably already know the >> difference. >> >> >> so I would just not focus on them >> >> >> >> Gregg >> ----------------------- >> Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D. >> Director Trace R&D Center >> Professor Ind and Biomed Engr >> University of Wisconsin-Madison >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Nov 25, 2008, at 7:54 AM, Shawn Henry wrote: >> >>> >>> EOWG and others who want to comment, >>> >>> Question for discussion on the EOWG mailing list: >>> How much should we use the terms "normative" and "informative" >>> in our basic introductory, education, and outreach >material related >>> to WCAG and the other WAI technical specifications? >>> Is it good to introduce and reinforce these terms, which >are used in >>> the technical documents, in our basic material? Or is it >unnecessary >>> to complicate the our basic material with what is to some jargony >>> terminology? >>> >>> (Note that WCAG 2.0 itself provides definitions of the terms.) >>> >>> Background: >>> >>> Last week in discussing "How to Update Your Web Site from WCAG 1.0 >>> to WCAG 2.0", we considered adding these terms in: "The WCAG 2.0 >>> technical standard itself is a stable, normative document >that will >>> not change once it is completed. However, Understanding >WCAG 2.0 and >>> Techniques for WCAG 2.0 are supporting informative resources that >>> can be updated. As technology develops, they will be enhanced with >>> additional tips, techniques, and best practices." See the next-to- >>> last paragraph in >>> ><http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/transition1to2/transition1to2-200811 >>> 21.html >>> > for how it's formatted and linked. >>> >>> Here's an example of not using the actual terms: "Thus with WCAG >>> 2.0, there are extensive supporting materials, which are advisory >>> documents. The WCAG 2.0 guidelines document itself is the only >>> document intended to be a Web standard..." - >>> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/wcag2faq#docs >>> > >>> >>> There are several places where we talk about the different >types of >>> documents, for example: >>> * Overview of WCAG 2.0 Documents (old draft) >>> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag20.php >>> > >>> * The WCAG 2.0 Documents (old draft) >>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/wcag20-docs >>> * How WAI Develops Accessibility Guidelines through the W3C >>> Process: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/w3c-process.php> >>> * WAI-ARIA Overview <http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria.php> >>> >>> Your thoughts on whether or not we should use "normative" and >>> "informative" in some of these types of EO documents? If some but >>> not all, which? >>> >>> Regards, >>> ~Shawn >>> >>> ----- >>> Shawn Lawton Henry >>> W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) >>> e-mail: shawn@w3.org >>> phone: +1.617.395.7664 >>> about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 26 November 2008 06:41:20 UTC