Re: Notes from Face to Face: Things being looked for in 2.0

On 8/07/2003 11:28 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden at gv@wiscmail.wisc.edu wrote:

...
> 3.      They liked the bonus points.
> 
> (That is, some mechanism for getting credit between levels.  With WCAG 1.0, if
> you couldnąt do one item in level 2, there was no way of getting any credit at
> all.  Level 3 was felt to be unachievable.)
> 
> (Note:  The idea of providing credit for individual points between levels is
> still under discussion and a decision has not yet been made even though it was
> cited here as an advantage of WCAG 2.0.)
...

Hi Gregg and all

I note that there are 9 core checkpoints and 9 extended checkpoints in the
Current internal Working Draft - 16 June 2003.

If each core checkpoint is given a value of 10 points, and each extended
checkpoint is given a value of 1 point, then:

Conformance Claims
1.    
In order to make a valid conformance claim for a Web resource, the resource
must satisfy all required success criteria for all Core checkpoints.

2.    
A conformance claim of "WCAG 2.0 Core" can be made if all required success
criteria for all core checkpoints have been met.  That is, it must 'score'
90 points.

3.    
A conformance claim of "WCAG 2.0 Extended" can be made if all required
success criteria for all core checkpoints and all extended checkpoints have
been met.  That is, it must 'score' 99 points.

4.    
A conformance claim of "WCAG 2.0 Core+" can be made if all required success
criteria for all core checkpoints and some extended checkpoints have been
met.  That is, a 'score' above 90 points can be used to indicate how many
extended checkpoints have been met.



Please note that ratio of 10:1 makes it impossible to reach the "WCAG 2.0
Core" score without implementing all the core checkpoints.  That is, a
developer can't substitute several extended checkpoints for one core
checkpoint and still reach the required score.

Unfortunately, the extended checkpoints don't seem to be worth much in a
10:1 ratio. 

My apologies if a similar approach has been suggested previously.  I don't
remember seeing it on the list.

-- 
Jonathan O'Donnell
04 2575 5829
http://purl.nla.gov.au/net/jod/
mailto:jonathan.odonnell@ngv.vic.gov.au

Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2003 19:35:32 UTC