- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 14:18:57 -0500
- To: "Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, jbrewer@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1094152737.5787.29.camel@seabright>
On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 14:08, Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) wrote: > This could mean that we could have inaccessible web sites with "n" other parallel web sites. > This could be good if contents are presented in different "version" by css or xslt, but made "n" parallel sites - imho - means not support the "design for all". I think that this point is one of the point that could be rewieved in a wcag 1.0 second edition and/or with an integration in the cited note (a wcag errata?) I haven't been involved in WCAG discussions lately, so I am behind where people in the WCAG WG are in their thinking about this checkpoint and more generally about alternative content (e.g., whether it suffices to have a generic version available from which specially-tailored versions could be produced, whether all alternatives have to be available client side, whether some tailored versions could reside on the server until requested, etc.). I think that your interpretation of WCAG 1.0 is correct. Whether it is desirable is another question, presumably one the WCAG WG is considering. _ Ian > ----- Messaggio originale ----- > Da: "Ian B. Jacobs"<ij@w3.org> > Inviato: 02/09/04 20.50.37 > A: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG"<rscano@iwa-italy.org> > Cc: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "jbrewer@w3.org"<jbrewer@w3.org> > Oggetto: Re: WCAG 1.0 - checkpoint 11.4, policy and parallel web sites > On Mon, 2004-08-30 at 03:07, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote: > > Hi to all the group. > > I hope this message isn't off topic. > > > > This regards the WCAG 1.0 Reccomandation [1] and expecially the > > checkpoint 11.4: > > > > 11.4 If, after best efforts, you cannot create an accessible page, > > provide a link to an alternative page that uses W3C technologies, is > > accessible, has equivalent information (or functionality), and is > > updated as often as the inaccessible (original) page. [Priority 1] > > [snip] > > > Discussing in web accessibility mailing lists, also with the > > partecipation of some lawyers, as explained the checkpoint *could* > > authorize - after best efforts - to create parallel web sites that is a > > group of "alternative page for every page". > > Yes, as far as I understand, that is true. Why is this problematic > (other than for the reasons cited in the checkpoint and note)? > > _ Ian > > -- > Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs > Tel: +1 718 260-9447 > > > [Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.] -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Thursday, 2 September 2004 19:19:04 UTC