- From: <lguarino@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 13:28:07 -0800
- To: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- Cc: "'WAI WCAG List'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Chris, It seems like we should be looking at these tests to see if there are SC or Guidelines that we should add. Loretta ----- Original Message ----- From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca> Date: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 1:21 pm Subject: Re: Conformance Level Clarification > > OK. The current conformance level model stays. It flows from: > Principle to Guideline to Conformance Level to Success Criteria to > TestMaterials. > > Some of the conformance testing materials will not fit within the > narrow definition of the SCs but they are still useful. > > It would be a shame to just throw them in the ocean and forget > about them. > But where should these materials be placed? > > There's been discussion about creating an "optional" or "best > practices"category to hold these things. Items in the "optional" > category would not be > required for conformance but are useful for increasing > accessibility. Is > there still interest in creating an "optional" category? > > Another option is to keep these materials outside of WAI to avoid > confusionwith the WCAG conformance materials. It could confuse > people to see a list > of things that we know increase accessibility but they're not > required by > the WCAG. These materials could be rolled back into our ATRC Open > Accessibility Checks[1] site where we can keep track of them. > > How do people feel - keep these things at WAI under an "optional" > categoryor move them to another site? > > Cheers, > Chris > > [1] http://oac.atrc.utoronto.ca > > >
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2005 21:28:10 UTC