Re: More on How WCAG 2.0 Differs from WCAG 1.0 (updated Tue 16 Dec)

As this is about the difference between the two and most people will be 
familiar with 1.0, perhaps it makes sense to begin with the shortcomings 
of 1.0, then say how 2.0 improves on it. So perhaps your sentence "WCAG 
1.0 that mixed user needs and technical solutions..." should open the 
paragraph.

Perhaps this section (as online, not Wayne's suggestion) would be easier 
to read if the paragraphs were front-loaded with the key concept first. 
At present each paragraph starts with "WCAG 2.0 applies...", "The WCAG 
2.0 requirements...", "WCAG 2.0 was developed...", "Along with WCAG 
2.0...". It might be clearer starting with "Different technologies...", 
"More testable...", "Harmonisation...", "Support material..."

The link "Benefits of WCAG 2.0 presentation" is ambiguous. Perhaps 
"Presentation slides and video on the Benefits of WCAG 2.0" would be 
clearer.

regards,

Alan


Wayne Dick escribió:
> 
> I think the first paragraph should read like:
> 
> WCAG 2.0 is defined in terms of the access needs of Web users with 
> disabilities. All of the technical descriptions of how to meet these 
> needs are published in separate documents. This differs from WCAG 1.0 
> that mixed user needs and technical solutions within the language of 
> many guidelines and checkpoints. The approach of WCAG 1.0 ensured that 
> the guidelines would become less relevant as technology advanced. By 
> defining only what is needed by users with disabilities in the 
> guidelines and success criteria, WCAG 2.0 applies more broadly to 
> different types of Web technologies and to more advanced technologies. 
> It will apply to technologies developed in the future, because the 
> access needs of users with disabilities do not change.
> 
> 
> Wayne
> 
> PS. I actually have read more than the first paragraph
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 18 December 2008 10:34:23 UTC