- From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 13:27:16 +1000 (EST)
- To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Without disagreeing in any way with what Matt said, I would point out that WCAG 1.0 was deliberately designed not to allow people to claim that their sites were "accessible"; rather, the only claims permitted by the guidelines were that one of the conformance levels had been met, and thereby prohibitive/serious/not-so-serious barriers to accessibility had been overcome, to paraphrase the effect of the three priority levels. As I remember, there was a quite specific discussion of the point during the development of 1.0, at which it was decided that conformance claims should not be expressed in terms of "being accessible" or "not being accessible". I agree with Matt that in version 2.0 this should be made clearer. We also need to add explanatory material that clarifies the rationale underlying the 2.0 conformance scheme. What these considerations indicate is the importance of introductory and explanatory material within the guidelines document itself.
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 23:27:19 UTC