RE: 3.2.4 edit?

I acknowledge that it is potentially problematic for me to constantly refract WCAG 2.0 through the prism of my understanding of the Section 508 Accessibility Standards, but the habit seems to be more beneficial than harmful.

I interpret WCAG 2.0 SC 3.2.4 to be analogous to §508 1194.21(e):

When bitmap images are used to identify controls, status indicators, or other programmatic elements, the meaning assigned to those images shall be consistent throughout an application’s performance.

>From that, I suggest:

Components that have the same functionality within content are identified consistently.

If it is not necessary, why differentiate between multiple uses of a single image on a single web page, versus that image appearing on multiple pages throughout a web site?  Again, scoping becomes a factor.  We care that the component be identified consistently only within whatever is being claimed as conforming -- that could be a single page, a whole site, or a discrete web application.


-----Original Message-----
From:	w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org on behalf of Gregg Vanderheiden
Sent:	Wed 2/8/2006 3:00 PM
To:	w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Cc:	
Subject:	3.2.4   edit?

Shouldn’t 

3.2.4 Components that have the same functionality <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#samefunctionalitydef>  in multiple delivery <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#deliveryunitdef>  units within a set of delivery units are identified consistently. [How <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20060117/Overview.html#consistent-behavior-consistent-functionality>  to meet 3.2.4] 

Really be

3.2.4 Components that have the same functionality <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#samefunctionalitydef>  within a delivery <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#deliveryunitdef>  unit or set of delivery units are identified consistently. [How <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20060117/Overview.html#consistent-behavior-consistent-functionality>  to meet 3.2.4]