- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 13:59:47 -0800
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 01:47 PM 12/22/00 -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
>Isn't that a conformance issue, though?
Nope. It's a reporting of (asserted) conformance details, not conformance
per se. The external checks on trustworthiness will ensue, I'm sure.
"you would instead be relying on self-reported claims of compliance."
Yep. And the means to test that these claims: 1) were asserted; 2)
specified how they were tested and are testable, e.g. "I ran Bobby on this"
or...
Even though this is in theory doable with just icons, the proposed detailed
methods provide a lot more context/confidence/checkability (love that
alliteration).
--
Love.
ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Friday, 22 December 2000 18:12:44 UTC