- From: Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es>
- Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:48:57 +0200
- To: wloughborough@gmail.com
- CC: WCAG WG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
I think you're missing the point. I only mention UWEM as a publicly available example of what goes into evaluation reports every day around the world. > In other words is there some separate "European > methodology" that is distinct from that used by Shadi and other BAD > editors? It only covers WCAG 1.0 so it does not apply. > I believe this is the first time I've noticed any inclusion of their > efforts/concerns in EOWG and wonder how this relates to the overall > goal of "harmonis(z)ation"? It was done at the behest of the European Commission's Information Society Technologies Programme, which also sponsors WAI, and makes possible the WAI-AGE project and thus the BAD. The WAB cluster projects completed their work some time ago now. They were charged by the European Commission to produce a methodology to harmonize interpretation of WCAG 1.0. WAI reviewed the deliverables. cheers, Alan William Loughborough escribió: > The "WAB Cluster" at <http://www.wabcluster.org/index.html> describes > itself as "A cluster of European projects to develop a harmonized > European methodology for evaluation and benchmarking of websites" and > "...quality of the methodology, including its validation, > participation of relevant stakeholders, support from and possible > endorsement by or inclusion of comments from W3C/WAI, will be > essential for a subsequent European-wide acceptation. When possible > work for the cluster will be closely coordinated or take place inside > WAI Working Groups (e.g. WCAG WG, ERT and EOWG)." > > I believe this is the first time I've noticed any inclusion of their > efforts/concerns in EOWG and wonder how this relates to the overall > goal of "harmonis(z)ation"? Are we going to need a pair (at least) of > evaluation criteria? In other words is there some separate "European > methodology" that is distinct from that used by Shadi and other BAD > editors? Is there any way to "harmonis(z)e various harmoniz(s)ations" > or are we going to have arrays of rules made distinct, sort of i18n's > own Tower of Babel? > > Perhaps I'm suffering a years-long "senior moment" but I don't recall > being asked to provide "inclusion of comments...for a subsequent > European-wide acceptation" or had any work for the cluster show up on > our agendas. > > Love. > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es> wrote: > < Accessibility evaluation reports may flag a success > < criterion or checkpoint as not applicable when... > < > < It might be useful guidance to make this explicit in the BAD reports, but > < even more, the WCAG WG could give its opinion to make clear when a success > < criterion can be flagged as "not applicable" in a conformance report. > > -- Alan Chuter Departamento de Usabilidad y Accesibilidad Consultor Technosite - Grupo Fundosa Fundación ONCE Tfno.: 91 121 03 30 Fax: 91 375 70 51 achuter@technosite.es http://www.technosite.es
Received on Monday, 5 October 2009 11:53:00 UTC