- From: <josh@interaccess.ie>
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 15:20:58 +0000
- To: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
- Cc: "GLWAI Guidelines WG org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> > >> On Oct 29, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie> >>wrote: >> This brings up a question … What are via alternatives to creating >>SCs? Without the SC approach, would it merely result a tranche of new >>techniques, or is there some other new or unused mechanism that might >>be an alternative? >> > > >I think the alternative would be to have guidelines and examples. > >The guidelines do not need to be testable — but set a goal. > >The examples show how it can be done. > >The idea would be to go beyond what you can require because requiring >something means it must be testable and apply everywhere. And there >are so many good ideas that don’t match these two requirements and >therefore don’t get recorded. > >Also - trying to get more things required will get much push back from >industry. And for some reason they are very against things that >relate to what they view as ‘usability’ - which is much or all of >cognitive disability. The are very much FOR it in design — but not >for it being required. The way to ride that — is to create a great >manual on how to do it — but avoid making SC or requirements because >a) it will then be resisted and diminished b) you will have to leave >out — or diminish yourself - so many good ideas because they can’t be >SC and if you have a few SC and mostly not— the mostly not (which will >most of the great stuff) will be second class citizens in your own >document. > Very useful info, thanks Gregg Josh > > >Gregg > > > > >> On Oct 29, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie> >>wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> TTBOMK, any new success criterion must be testable. If not, it’s a >>clear departure from the original WCAG requirements framework. If we >>do need to depart from the framework (for whatever reason) – then we >>cannot call these new SCs success criteria. We’d need to come up with >>something else. I’m only making an objective statement here, and not >>making any value judgement. >> >> This brings up a question relating to one of Greggs comments (and >>thanks Gregg for your very helpful input). What are via alternatives >>to creating SCs? Without the SC approach, would it merely result a >>tranche of new techniques, or is there some other new or unused >>mechanism that might be an alternative? >> >> Thanks >> >> Josh >> >> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 3 November 2015 15:20:59 UTC