W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Need for exemptions for teaching materials, samples, multilingual documents

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:32:02 +1000
Message-ID: <16996.42466.843530.625716@jdc.local>
To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
CC: Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Chris Ridpath writes:
 > Perhaps Joe's concerns can be addressed in a conformance statement. Wendy 
 > recently posted a draft of a WCAG2 conformance statement [2] that includes a 
 > required scope for the claim (item 7). She has suggested that the scope 
 > include a list of URI's or an expression that identifies the scope of the 
 > claim. I agree that the scope is a necessary part of the claim.
 > I suggest we allow authors to include exceptions within the scope statement. 

This is controversial. Some have argued that an explicit list or
regular expression identifying what the claim covers is better than a
list plus exceptions written in a natural language, because the former
is more amenable to autoamted evaluation.
 > For example a scope claim for the test suite could look like:
 > "All the HTML files in the test suite are WCAG2 Level 2 compliant except for 
 > example files that contain known accessibility problems."

in the above.

An alternative would be to name the files in such a way that a regular
expression can be easily written that picks up only the
URI's of WCAG-conformant documents, then use that to define the scope
of the claim.
 > In a case like this we could require that all links to non-compliant example 
 > files be clearly marked as such. We could also require that all the 
 > compliant files contain a conformance icon or statement.

Either or both of of these would be prudent, though not strictly
necessary. In other words they go beyond what WCAG strictly demands.
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2005 06:32:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:39 UTC