GL 1.3 vs GL 2.4

The relationship between GL 1.3 and 2.4 emerged at the Face 2 Face meeting
again, as well as questions about what is sufficient to meet the guidelines.
 
The subgroup didn't come to a consensus, but seems to think that we have two
alternatives:
 
Option 1)
  * GL 1.3 L1 SC1 is interpreted to mean that any structure that can be
expressed in a technology is expressed in a way that is programmatically
determined 
  * GL 1.3 L2 SC (optional, new): requires that structure is used to express
certain relationships in the content, e.g. tables
 * GL 2.4 only addresses explicit navigation elements (i.e. links) and the
use of structure for navigation is assumed to be addressed by GL 1.3 L1

Option 2)
  * GL 1.3, L1, SC 1 requires that structure be programmatically determined
when information is lost in the linearization of the content.
  * GL 1.3, L2 adds a success criterion that requires all structure that can
be expressed in the content
  * GL 2.4, L1 only addresses explicit navigation elements

In both cases, we would remove reference to navigating by structure from GL
2.4. GL 2.4 appears to address recognizing links programmatically.
 
Case 1 seems to be closer to what most other Success Criteria were assuming
from GL 1.3.

Case 2 is closer to the requirements of WCAG1, which only requires table
mark-up at level 1 and requires other structural markup at level 2.
 
Additional discussion can be found at

http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Guideline_1.3#Programat
ically_determined_and_Role

Or

http://tinyurl.com/dxvlg
 
Does the working group want to have a survey on which of these options to
adopt? Or include a discussion of the options in our working draft and
solicit public feedback?

Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2005 15:14:34 UTC