- From: Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 11:23:34 -0700
- To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Cc: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
1. WCAG Techniques can easily be written into contracts: e.g. "The state or province of X will only accept implementation of WCAG Techniques from the latest recommended version as evidence of meeting WCAG". Such contract language would thus allow for fluid changes to the Techniques Document. It would also protect consumes. A vendor who claimed to use WCAG Techniques would be liable if such claims were not true. 2. Contract language that permits locally generated techniques will not be enforceable. 3. Sole use of WCAG techniques would stimulate the WCAG WG to keep Techniques up-to-date to stimulate new technologies and coding techniques. It might even stimulate WCAG WG to streamline their process so that dated techniques would not be recommended beyond their time of usefulness. 4. As is the case of all implementation procedures, contract language could be expanded to include well regulated exceptions as follows: "The state or province of X will accept undocumented sufficient techniques provided that the vender provides proof of sufficiency that can be verified by the technical staff prior to delivery of software or payment of the contract. Should claims prove the to be false, the shall be terminated with no cost to the purchaser". The push to abridge the desire of consumers to move away from recognized techniques seems to favor vendors is a market that already favors vendors. Wayne
Received on Wednesday, 22 May 2013 18:24:05 UTC