- From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:20:36 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Cc: "Tim Boland" <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
>> (1) Does the W3C have guidance as to the format of >> TR, especially the "lowest level" parts (the success >> criteria in the case of WCAG 2.0)? > The QA Framework: Specification Guidelines [1] is a possible resource > pertinent as an answer to your Question #1. I also found [1] to be a better example for my question (2) than ATAG! >> (2) Are there other W3C TR that are along the lines >> of usage in a fashion similar to WCAG? My understanding is that, for example, the ISO guidelines for specification documents advocate using "shall" wherever possible. This phrasing facilitates statutory language, and does not seem to be incompatible with [1]. Is using "shall" a "best practice" or not? > [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2005 13:21:03 UTC