- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 22:49:44 -0800
- To: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
- Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 3:25 PM -0500 1/2/01, Leonard R. Kasday wrote: >Len again: >How about the following: That's a possible implementation, and that's fine. At the moment I'm gathering -requirements- for conformance schemes; how would you characterize (or reverse-engineer) the requirements expressed by the proposal you gave? Would you say that they are adequately summarized by the following: * Preserve compatibility with the WCAG 1.0 conformance scheme. * Expand the range of conformance claims beyond merely those within the WCAG 1.0 conformance scheme. * Allow reporting bodies flexibility in determining which parts of WCAG 2.0 to report compliance with. --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Wednesday, 3 January 2001 02:16:31 UTC