- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:55:21 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
- Cc: frederick.boland@nist.gov
In fulfillment of my action item from the Oct 6 WCAG Techniques telecon, I am proposing that the following text (or something like it) be added to "abstract" sections in the various July 30 WCAG techniques documents: "Use of the illustrative techniques given in this document may make it more likely for an offering to demonstrate conformance to WCAG 2.0 success criteria (by passing the relevant tests in the WCAG 2.0 test suite to be developed) than if these illustrative techniques are not used. There may be other techniques besides those given in this document that may be used to demonstrate conformance to WCAG 2.0; in that case, it is encouraged to submit those techniques to the WCAG WG for consideration for inclusion in this document, so that as complete a set of techniques as possible may be maintained by the WCAG WG as a public resource." This text is slightly stronger than what is currently in the "abstract" sections. The motivation for this proposal is to: (1) more strongly encourage offerers to consider using the techniques given in the WCAG techniques documents (which are maintained by the WCAG WG), (2). to encourage the submission of techniques to the WCAG WG, and (3) to include at least a reference to the upcoming WCAG test suite in the WCAG techniques documents. I think it is important to mention the upcoming WCAG test suite as prominently as possible and as soon as possible in the WCAG documentation, for QA and public education reasons. (EXAMPLE: the CSS module template has subsections specifically reserved for test suite discussion. I'm assuming the WCAG WG is intending to develop a test suite, because of the designation "testing and test suites" on the WCAG WG web site, but if I'm mistaken, I apologize in advance). ------------------------------------------------------------- ASIDE: Two "side questions" that I still have come to mind: (1) I am still a little confused as to how all the WCAG "layers" (test suite, checklist, general techniques, specific techniques, etc., guidelines) fit together in a way coherent to a user. Is it possible to add more of an explanation at the appropriate place in the WCAG documentation? (2) I feel that perhaps more specific information may be needed in certain instances as to exactly how, by using a specific technique given in a WCAG techniques document, a particular success criterion may be satisfied, or particular tests in the upcoming WCAG test suite may be passed. A technique is given as "related" to a guideline, but is it always obvious how the use of that technique would demonstrate conformance as mentioned previously? Perhaps some "bridge" language connecting the technique to the relevant success criterion/test(s) may be appropriate in a few instances? Thanks and best wishes, Tim Boland NIST
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2004 12:55:52 UTC