- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:59:48 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
- Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20031217145801.00add458@mailserver.nist.gov>
Attached is an extremely rough draft of my first thoughts at possible mappings of WCAG 2.0 WD 10/27/03 Guidelines and Success Criteria to CSS3 Modules. These thoughts are "off the top of my head" and are meant to stimulate discussion and thinking. The document is oriented towards levels of WCAG conformance. Comments welcome; not all of these modules will probably be applicable in practice, but I "stretched" in including them, thinking it would be easier to eliminate them later. It may not be possible to satisfy all WCAG success criteria just by using CSS techniques. I know until I actually generate CSS code I will not know if any of this is accurate, but this is just to put something on the table. I like Michael Cooper's observation of strong vs. weak CSS implications (thanks!) so I included that as well. Some thoughts that came to mind while doing this exercise: (1) to what extent is it possible (or feasible-practicable) to satisfy the various WCAG conformance levels by just using CSS as a supporting technology (applied to HTML, or to XML, or to SVG, or to something else)? What is a "minimum" combination of technologies that is needed for such satisfaction? (2) what does it mean for a CSS technique to have a significant or material influence in satisfying WCAG success criteria, as opposed to just a tangential or assistive role (with another technology being predominant)? Would it be better to organize WCAG success criteria in terms of degree of CSS involvement? (3) If there is a choice of combinations of technologies that would satisfy WCAG success criteria, which combination should be chosen? Since various CSS3 profiles are expected to incorporate different combinations of CSS3 modules, implementing one CSS3 profile over another may have implications as to also satisfying WCAG conformance levels. (4) Is the content of a WCAG guideline "monolithic" with regards to technologies needed to support that guideline? In other words, could I use different technologies to support level 1 of Guideline X than I would use to support level 2 of Guideline X (importance of the levels vs. importance of the guideline statement)? Right now the document is just something to "shoot at", but is this a possible direction for future development efforts? Thanks and happy holidays, Tim Boland NIST PS I will be sending two other attachments - one going the other way (CSS3 modules to WCAG success criteria),and one mapping WCAG to CSS2.1
Attachments
- text/html attachment: csswcag1.htm
Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2003 15:03:00 UTC