- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 12:18:56 -0800
- To: <gdeering@acslink.net.au>, "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: "WAI GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 6:30 AM +1100 1/23/02, Geoff Deering wrote: >Well, are those categories arbitrary? If they are, I think you are quit >right. But if those categories are grouped into meaningful collections, >then they no longer have arbitrary meaning; the category itself must then >have a meaning. If not, then why does it exist? > >Also; to meet a priority you need to fulfil ALL the checkpoints of that >priority. If this is not essential to claim conformance, why call it a >priority? You are probably asking the wrong person; I have been one of the primary critics of the current priority system, compliance scheme, and de facto implemenation scheme. In addition, there are a number of WCAG1 checkpoints which appear to have been classified incorrectly, even if you follow the WCAG1 stated criteria for inclusion. The categories chosen as "Single A", "Double A", and "Triple A" are, in my opinion, quasi-arbitrary, since they rely upon subjective (and sometimes faulty) value judgments which may vary from person to person, and even vary within time. At best they reflect "the ratings given to these checkpoints by the particular people within the WCAG working group at the time the documents were drafted, based upon a scale which is not defined clearly." That may be a useful measure, but note that the usefulness is very dependent upon the perspective of one group at one particular point in time, and those opinions can change. For example, the group's opinion on the importance of illustration has varied considerably, to the point that there cannot accurately be said to be a consensus that illustrations are a Priority Three checkpoint. (Note that I'm not claiming there's consensus that it's NOT Priority Three; but presumably at the time WCAG1 was issued, there was agreement in the working group on this. At the present time, I suspect you can find people who would argue anything from Priority One to Priority Three at this point.) Our understanding of accessibility issues continues to grow, and thus some priorities -- especially those "until user agents" checkpoints -- may not fit as well in 2002 as they did in 1998. --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire http://kynn.com/resume January Web Accessibility eCourse http://kynn.com/+d201 Forthcoming: Teach Yourself CSS in 24 Hours
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2002 15:21:34 UTC