- From: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>
- Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 18:44:12 +0000
- To: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- CC: "wuyinghua@ritt.cn" <wuyinghua@ritt.cn>, Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>, Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>, Wayne Dick <waynedick@knowbility.org>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, WG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "IG - WAI Interest Group List list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>-----Original Message----- >From: Sailesh Panchang [mailto:sailesh.panchang@deque.com] >Is there really a need for a date for techniques / failures? >The date of publication of the Techniques doc is the date it applies from. If >this is not clear, a single sentence may be added that says so. >Web content certified as compliant or pages that made a conformance >claim, say , in the previous year, may surely refer to the techniques doc in >effect at that time. Techniques are all non-normative. Thus, it's a matter for the content author to decide which techniques to consult when writing or revising Web pages that conform to WCAG. Of course, it's in their interests to review the most recent techniques document available, but they can still conform without consulting any techniques documents at all. If they consult an old document, apply its techniques, and thereby conform to WCAG, they're still conforming. ________________________________ This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. Thank you for your compliance. ________________________________
Received on Monday, 9 May 2016 19:03:08 UTC