- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 00:05:11 -0500
- To: "'Roberto Scano \(IWA/HWG\)'" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, <ij@w3.org>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, <jbrewer@w3.org>
As long as one of the N sites meets all the guidelines -- and it is the version you get if you don't or can't do content negotiation - then it should be fine. Else I think is would be a problem. Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 2:09 PM To: ij@w3.org Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; jbrewer@w3.org Subject: Re: WCAG 1.0 - checkpoint 11.4, policy and parallel web sites 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?) ----- 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.]
Received on Tuesday, 7 September 2004 05:05:15 UTC