- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 15:11:17 -0600
- To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
- Cc: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Eval TF <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
On Feb 15, 2013, at 2:20 AM, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote: > Hi Gregg, > > Thank you very much for getting this started! I think this will be a useful resource in many ways, including for reuse in WCAG-EM. > > A couple of initial comments: > > #1. The document does not describe the relationship between techniques and failures to the WCAG2 Success Criteria. There is some wording in Understanding WCAG 2.0 that could be at least referenced to put this resource more in context of the overall WCAG2 framework and resources. Fixed See new draft http://tinyurl.com/WCAGTechNote > > #2. The document seems to primarily talk about techniques and failures document by the WCAG WG and does not talk much about the possibility for other techniques and failures. This may reinforce the unfortunate myth that only WCAG WG can document techniques and failures. Fixed > > #3. (Minor) the overall tone seems more preventive and negative rather than inviting. For example, how about something like "The Role of Techniques and Failures in WCAG 2" rather than "Proper Use of WCAG 2.0 Techniques and Failures"? I think we need to find the balance between explaining what techniques and failures are, and cautioning potential misuse due to misunderstanding of their intended purpose. Yes it is. And after reading it over again (and making edits to address your comments ) it still is a bit - and I think perhaps it should be. (not negative - but short and focused on clarifying rather than instructing. "The Role of...." is all in the Understanding document. We were asked for something VERY SHORT and VERY CLEAR that could be used by people who misunderstood the Role. I am concerned that adding more words -- or turning this into a general discussion -- would defeat what we were asked for. That being said - I have tried to add more text to the document to help with your comments above. Take a look. > > Regards, > Shadi > > > On 15.2.2013 00:56, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: >> >> We have for some time had a problem with people misunderstanding WCAG 2.0 Techniques and Failures. Many have thought that the Techniques were required in order to conform to WCAG 2.0. We have done a number of things to address this - but not always with success. >> >> A suggestion was made that we create a single page with a simple message that could be pointed to by people wishing to make proper use of the Techniques clear. It was pointed out that such a page would be useful to many stakeholders and organizations, including the WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Taskforce. >> >> Such a page is posted for comments and suggestions at http://tinyurl.com/WCAGTechNote >> >> This page allows you to directly comment on the page. The page will be edited dynamically, so you can return to the page to see changes. You can also subscribe to the page to have comments and changes sent to you directly as they happen. (click on the Comments button and select "notification options".) >> >> The options you will find there are >> >> >> Notification settings >> Don't send me any email notifications (not recommended) >> Enable email notifications >> Notify me of all new comments and replies >> Notify me of replies to my comments >> Notify me of replies to threads that I have commented on >> Notify me when I am +mentioned in a comment >> >> >> >> >> Gregg >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D. >> Director Trace R&D Center >> Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering >> and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison >> Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info >> Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org >> and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project - http://GPII.net >> >> > > -- > Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ > Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office > Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG) > Research and Development Working Group (RDWG) >
Received on Saturday, 16 February 2013 21:11:42 UTC