C-6 Killed --- New C-6 proposed. R1-2 and N3-4-5 covered.

At our teleconference today (actually yesterday now) , we killed
consensus item C-6, which read:

“C-6.  GL should provide hooks in WCAG to allow someone to provide a way
for people to measure access against particular disabilities, but it
should not be used for conformance.”

It was decided that it was too dangerous to put hooks into the
guidelines which could be used by people to selectively extract
guidelines by disability.  We continue to affirm C-5, which stated that
information about the benefit to people with different disabilities
should be part of the guidelines.  But we felt that any mechanisms that
might be used for automatic sorting or pruning were not a good idea.

To replace the old C-6, the group is advancing the following, which
provides more specifics on how the disability-related information
discussed in C-5 should be provided.

NEW C-6.  The rationale for each checkpoint should make clear which
groups would benefit and how.  An impact matrix should be provided
overall.

If people see problems with the new C-6, please comment on the list;
otherwise, it will replace the deleted C-6.

We also addressed the issues around R-1, R-2 and N-3.  Our understanding
of the concerns expressed was that it was felt that R-1 was okay as long
as R-2 was there, and that N-3 was okay as long as N-4 and N-5 were
there.  Since all of these items are matters of consensus now, it would
be our understanding that the concerns raised are now addressed.  If
this is inaccurate, then please re-post concerns.

Finally, we were able to address two more big issues.  For convenience
in threading discussions, I will include those consensus statements in
the email immediately following this one.



-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Professor - Human Factors
Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis.
Director - Trace R & D Center
Gv@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <http://trace.wisc.edu/>
FAX 608/262-8848 
For a list of our listserves send “lists” to listproc@trace.wisc.edu
<mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu>

Received on Friday, 5 October 2001 11:36:42 UTC