- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 16:51:54 -0000
- To: "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>, "WAI" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> > Information about the icons and how to insert them in > > pages is available at [WCAG-ICONS]. > > If we come up with a good logo that is using mark up, we > violate the criteria for conformance claim. Nope, because *our* logos conform to both Form1 and the WCAG guidelines:- [[[ Form 1: Specify: The guidelines title: "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0" The guidelines URI: http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-19990505 The conformance level satisfied: "A", "Double-A", or "Triple-A". The scope covered by the claim (e.g., page, site, or defined portion of a site.). ]]] - http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/ So I reckon as our logos are more WCAG compliant than the WCAG logos themselves, we may as well use them (and legally so). Also, I suppose we could ask the editors of the [WCAG-ICONS] document to add our "good markup logo(s)" is they think it is appropriate. (Wendy/Gregg/Ian???) That is, if there are no qualms about the accessibility of our efforts over that of the text-in-images ones? Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer http://infomesh.net/sbp/ "Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics." - Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.
Received on Saturday, 30 December 2000 11:51:44 UTC