- 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