Re: FW: Mock-up of merged WCAG 2.0 and XAG

On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 03:51, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:
> XAG could become a Techniques Document for WCAG 2.0....
> Like HTML, CSS, etc. techniques.
> What do you think about this proposal?

I think XAG requirements deserve to be at the same level
as WCAG requirements. 

In the proposal linked below, the basic idea is that
WCAG 2.0 would say "To build accessible content, you start 
with a format that supports accessibility." What defines
"an accessible format"? Another series of requirements that
are already well-known to the WAI Community:

  * if the format supports audio, it must also support
    the ability to associate a synchronized transcript.
  * if the format supports images, it must also support
    text equivalents, 

And so forth. These are some of the XAG requirements today.
They themselves have techniques associated with them:

 * What's a good way to allow authors to provide alternatives?
   The "alt" approach of HTML or the "switch" element of SMIL?
   What are the advantages of each approach? 

 _ Ian

> > [2] http://www.w3.org/2003/11/12-ij-wcag20.html

-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447