- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 13:17:11 +0000
- To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- CC: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2020 13:17:28 UTC
Hi John, Could you clarify how that is different from the current situation? For example, the 2.x conformance model allows the conformer to specify what is in/out of scope based on web pages. Processes need to be dealt with as a unit, but according to the spec, you choose URIs to conform. As we all know, in practice laws (at least in the UK/EU) assume all pages (or don’t specify), and we come to some sort of sampling method, to get coverage and provide some confidence across larger sites. My point is: Should the standard be defining coverage? Or would it be better to make the same sort of assumptions as 2.x and leave it to regulators to say whether a site should cover all tasks, or what the sampling is? Cheers, -Alastair
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2020 13:17:28 UTC