Re: baseline_overview_draft.htm

Gez,
  I think the idea is that baselines may be defined by some authority other
than the author. The baseline technologies become the set of permitted
technologies from which an author can choose.
  An author may still rely on only a subset of the baseline technologies.
For example, if the baseline includes scripting, it is not required that an
author use scripting.
  If an author wants to use a technology that is not in an externally
defined baseline, conformance would still permit this, as long as the
content is accessible via user agents that only support the baseline
technologies. So if the baseline doesn't include scripting, the content must
still be accessible if scripting is disabled.
  If the author is defining the baseline, I can't imagine why the baseline
would not be identical to, or a subset of, the set of techologies used.

Loretta

On 11/20/05 12:38 PM, "Gez Lemon" <gez.lemon@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> I'm confused about the words "relied upon" and "used, but not relied
> upon" in the document that defines the baseline. I thought the
> baseline was for the author (or higher authority) to state the minimum
> set of technologies that should be supported by the a user agent in
> order to make a conformance claim. Particularly as the document states
> that other technologies may be used providing they do not impact the
> accessibility of the content. This seems to be a contradiction in
> terms, but will be important to understand in terms of evaluating the
> accessibility of a website.
> 
> If a conformance claim states that CSS is used in the baseline, but
> doesn't mention that it is relied upon, then it's reasonable to assume
> that the content will adhere to WCAG 2.0 when style sheets are not
> supported or disabled in the user agent. In which case, why mention
> CSS in the baseline? The definition of baseline states that the
> technologies listed are the minimum required to receive the content by
> a user agent, but other technologies may be used providing they do not
> affect the accessibility of the content. The same applies to other
> technologies, such as scripting. If scripting is used without having
> an impact on the accessibility of the document, why mention it in the
> baseline?
> 
> It might make sense to mention something that is absolutely necessary
> for the baseline, like HTML, and then just use CSS, scripting, and
> other technologies in a way that does not affect the accessibility of
> the document. If these other technologies do not affect the
> accessibility, I don't understand the rationale of declaring them in
> the baseline, as they are not the minimum set of technologies required
> to meet the conformance claim. It only makes sense to me to mention
> those items that are assumed to be supported in order to make the
> conformance claim.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Gez
> 
> --
> _____________________________
> Supplement your vitamins
> http://juicystudio.com
>

Received on Sunday, 20 November 2005 21:26:06 UTC