- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 12:45:42 -0400
- To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Below is an exchange with the Government of Canada on the question of TR. We don't discuss anything about the logistics of link addresses etc. which Gregg brought up and I think we need to consider carefully separately. This exchange is just about the question of scrutiny before publication and authority of the techniques. I think the main take away is they don't perceive a proposed move away from TR as something that would mess up their existing policies. ==== Government of Canada question: Hi David, So the techniques and failures would continue to be updated but there potentially could be less rigour? What would be the difference in the vetting process between the two scenarios? ========= David response: I think in practicality it would be the same scrutiny, they would still be put out for public review, but with the advantage of being able to fix bugs quicker etc...... we usually don't get many people commenting during our public calls for review. ======= Government of Canada: Okay, then I don't think it would be much of an issue for us, as the Standard on Web Accessibility would require the techniques to be used and the failures to be avoided regardless of their official status at the W3C. Being maintained and updater quicker would be a good thing. Cheers, David MacDonald Cheers, David MacDonald CanAdapt Solutions Inc. Tel: 613.235.4902 LinkedIn 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
Received on Saturday, 23 May 2015 16:46:15 UTC