- From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 17:47:06 -0400
- To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
done. --w At 04:38 PM 4/26/02, Judy Brewer wrote: >At 11:35 AM 4/26/2002 -0400, Wendy A Chisholm wrote: >>Here is the detailed list of editorial changes. The doc is available from: >>http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wcag20-requirements >> >><...> >> >>1. Added an abstract. It says: >>This document lists the requirements for the Web Content Accessibility >>Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0). Appendix A lists a set of statements that the >>Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (WCAG WG) has agreed >>to while writing WCAG 2.0. These statements will help frame future decisions. > >This is ambiguous. It sounds like it is a documentation of requirements >that were incorporated into a completed document, not the requirements for >something that you are building, which is the case here. It sounds as >though the statements in the requirements document might be applied to >something in the future beyond WCAG 2.0, rather than to decisions on >Working Drafts of WCAG 2.0 as it evolves. Moreover, it does not emphasize >the fact that feedback on the Requirements document is welcomed, which is >a particularly important role of the abstract of a Requirements document. > >In terms of resolving these ambiguities, actually you've got the ideal >text already in place under the "Status" section, at paragraph 2: > >"This is a W3C Working Draft produced by the Web Content Accessibility >Guidelines Working Group (WCAG WG). The purpose of this document is to >outline the requirements for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. The >Working Group encourages feedback about these requirements as well as >participation in the development of the revision by people who have >experience trying to create Web content that conforms to WCAG 1.0." > >Since it appears that the status section would work fine without that >paragraph, and since that paragraph accomplishes everything that's needed >in an abstract, and the WCAG WG has already presumably approved that >language, I'd recommend moving the 2nd paragraph of the Status section up >as a replacement for the abstract that was recently added. > >- Judy > > >-- >Judy Brewer +1.617.258.9741 http://www.w3.org/WAI >Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >MIT/LCS Room NE43-355, 200 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA -- wendy a chisholm world wide web consortium web accessibility initiative seattle, wa usa /--
Received on Friday, 26 April 2002 17:44:46 UTC