RE: Stucture of WCAG documents.doc

 Comments below marked GV: 

-----Original Message-----
From:   Tim Boland
 

Re: "Tests" section in WCAG documents.doc, how will conformance to WCAG2.0
  be objectively demonstrated, if not by passing
tests in a WCAG2.0 test suite that has extensive coverage?  

GV: they must be stated in objective terms.  If tests are required to make
them objective - then tests must be normative and included with guidelines. 



 Shouldn't such test documentation be used as part of a WCAG2.0 conformance
claim, not just to indicate successful use of techniques?  

GV:  The tests are of use of the techniques - not the guidelines.
Techniques can be used to meet guidelines.  Tests are used to indicate
successful implementation of techniques.    If one can create a direct test
of the SC - great.  But it is not required to be met if it is possible to
meet the SC in any other way.  The SC is the determinant.  Not the test.  By
definition. 



 If not, what will be the alternative?   What does conformance to WCAG2.0
mean explicitly and in detail?

GV:  Exactly what the SC says.   That is the definition of a standard - and
being normative. 




What  objective evidence will be provided for WCAG2.0 CR exit criteria of
widespread support of the WCAG 2.0 specification?

GV:  This is a very good question.  Our standard is different than a
technology standard - so our evidence needs to be more than 3 sites that
follow them. 



Ref: SpecGL LC WD Requirement: Include a conformance clause (in Section 1:
Specifying Conformance):

http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/

What will be in that conformance clause that offerers can use to objectively
demonstrate conformance to WCAG2.0 specification (not just the WCAG2.0
techniques)?

GV: I'm not sure I understand the question. 
The conformance clause doesn't demonstrate conformance, it asserts it.  




Thanks and best wishes,
Tim Boland NIST

Received on Monday, 14 March 2005 19:08:41 UTC