W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2015

Re: Recommendation to move WCAG Techniques out of TR, concerned about Failure Techniques loosing authority

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 23:17:19 -0400
Cc: GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D266D712-8166-4244-BFAA-46370D16CB08@raisingthefloor.org>
To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
Techniques are Notes - so they can be amended at any time.   (you could revise them monthly - but we usually put them out for review first -  and I would presume that would still be the practice no matter where we put them.)        What is the perceived delay (other than something like a week for technical publishing process) in having them in TR? 

Moving them out of TR makes them harder to find.  that is where all the other W3C Notes are.  Why would we want these to be less official than all the other notes of the W3C?

I don’t see any reason to move them - and lots of reasons not to.  

Can you  explain the logic of moving them more?  

gregg

----------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden
gregg@raisingthefloor.org




> On May 19, 2015, at 1:17 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> 
> There is a discussion in today's meeting about possibly amending technique authoring process to possibly move the Techniques  out of TR space going forward to speed up the cycle. 
> 
> This is in the new Charter proposal.  http://www.w3.org/2015/04/draft-wcag-charter <http://www.w3.org/2015/04/draft-wcag-charter>
> 
> Section 2 Deliverables 
> 
> "Understanding WCAG 2.0 <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/>, to be published as a W3C Working Group Note or as a curated resource of the Working Group. Understanding WCAG 2.0 explains the intent of each Success Criterion and links to known sufficient techniques, both general and technology-specific;"
> 
> The proposal in the charter allows the group to go either way, so the discussion is not a show stopper for the Charter. 
> 
> However, there is a discussion that the weight and authority of failures might be affected by this, and there may be legal implications in environments that look to the common failures as evidence in court.
> 
> I would be interested in a fairly wide discussion of this, which includes prior WCAG member and affected jurisdictions... I think there are court cases all over the world that cite a WCAG failure technique violations as an authoritative indication that a web site (page) doesn't meet WCAG requirements.
> 
> Similarly, there may be some circumstances of web masters are defending their claims that they met WCAG by citing a WCAG technique.
> 
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>  
> CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
> Tel:  613.235.4902
> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>   
>   Adapting the web to all users
>             Including those with disabilities
> 
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2015 03:17:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:19 UTC