- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 12:34:27 -0500
- To: "'Ineke van der Maat'" <inekemaa@xs4all.nl>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
That is a good question Ineke,
I think it breaks down into two questions.
1 - should someone who conforms to WCAG 1-AAA automatically
conform to WCAG 2-Level 3 ??
2 - should WCAG 2.0 provide any improved access (which would
Preclude #1) along with fixing the problems with 1.0 ??
We would actually like to do both. But the best I know if is that we have
talked about people choosing which they want - and also possibly allowing
old content to follow one with new the other. But these are just
discussions so far.
Your thoughts?
Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center
University of Wisconsin-Madison
-----Original Message-----
From: Ineke van der Maat [mailto:inekemaa@xs4all.nl]
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 11:30 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call
Hello Greg,
You wrote;
> If they do not want to do this - they do not have to. And I can see no
> conditions under which phantasy sites would ever be required to conform to
> Level 3. So it is just guidance on what to do if you want to.
>
Because all my pages, including my phantasy-poems, now conform to wcag-AAA.
And why should not that be possible with wcag 2.? And I assume i am not the
only one who is writing phantasy-poems and conform to WCAG 1.0-AAA now.
greetings
Ineke van der Maat
Received on Friday, 27 May 2005 17:34:31 UTC