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

Re: 2 levels or 3

From: Matt May <mcmay@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 17:25:52 -0700
Message-ID: <42B21890.8000301@w3.org>
To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

>The topic of levels of conformance was discussed in the Face to Face.  In
>the process a number of options were identified.  Most of the options have
>to do with what to do with the items at levels 1,2 and 3 if a two level
>system was adopted.   
>The following options were considered:
>1.  three levels (as current)

I think I've expressed my opinion on this option.

>2.  two levels (everything in 3 is moved out of guidelines 
>       and put in advisory/guide)

I would approve of this approach. I would also approve of leaving an 
informative section of "best practices" within each guideline.

>3.  two levels (some of level 3 is moved to advisory/guide, 
>       some of level 3 is moved up to level 2)

I think it's safe to assume that some L3 items would try to migrate 
upward as we debate them.

>4.  two levels where everything from 3 is combined into 2
>5.  two levels where everything in 3 is moved up to level 2 
>       and certain items from level 2 are moved up to level 1

I disapprove of these two. In my opinion, the point of the debate is not 
to compress the levels for the sake of compressing them. It's to create 
two reasonable conformance levels authors can choose from, and avoid 
creating an unreasonable level that only causes confusion.

>6.  one level which is normative (which includes level 1 
>       and some of level 2 SCs), rest is informative provisions

I'm surprised, but intrigued. Did the group determine which/how many 
level 2 SCs would be included?

>7.  three levels, where level 3 is divided into several 
>       categories that people can claim conformance to.
>RE: #7 - the L3 SCs would be grouped by categories such as "Media" or
>"Seizure".  Some of these would have just one SC in them.  People could
>claim Level 2 conformance plus conformance to the "Media" items at level 3.
>They could also claim conformance to Level 3 if they wished. 

At first glance, this one looks good, but doesn't solve much. It still 
allows people to overclaim conformance, and it also creates divisions 
among disabilities, which I thought we decided not to do. 
Disability-specific checklists are something that could go into advisory 
or informative text just as successfully.

Received on Friday, 17 June 2005 00:25:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:40 UTC