Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call

If the group answers "yes" to the question in excerpted message following, 
then I think it should be clearly stated in WCAG 2.0 exactly how, by 
satisfying WCAG 1.0-AAA, an offerer would satisfy all WCAG 2.0 Level 3 
success criteria (that is, such conformance should be expressed in WCAG2.0 
terminology and in terms of the WCAG2.0 conformance model).   I'm not aware 
of a definition of "automatic" conformance in QA SpecGL Glossary [1] 
(although definitions of "conformance", "conformance clause", and "strict 
conformance" are provided).  Please access QA SpecGL Requirement 06 - 
"create conformance labels for each part of the conformance model" [2] for 
more information; possibly other QA SpecGL requirements and best practices
are relevant as well.

Perhaps there are also some other WCAG2.0 "conformance clause" and 
"applicability" issues pertaining to possible use of WCAG1.0, if 
conformance to WCAG1.0 is being used to claim conformance to 
WCAG2.0.  Please access QA SpecGL Requirement 01 - "include a conformance 
clause" [3] and QA SpecGL Requirement 02 - "define the scope" [4] for more 
information; possibly other QA SpecGL requirements and best practices are 
relevant as well.

Thanks and best wishes
Tim Boland NIST


[1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#glossary
[2]" http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#conf-label-principle
[3]: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#include-conformance-clause-principle
[4]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#define-scope-principle






>>1 - should someone who conforms to WCAG 1-AAA  automatically
>>    conform to WCAG 2-Level 3 ??
>

Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2005 14:03:47 UTC