RE: Is AAA possible?

I am confused by this position.  It seems to me that going from double-A to
tripple-A is not that much work.  What are the checkpoints that are onerous?
I will admit that I see double-A as having significant implications for
designers (with the prohibition against textual graphics, deprecated HTML
elements, and virtual requirment for style sheets).  But once one is
comfortable with strict (X)HTML and CSS, how much addtional work are the P3
items?

> ----------
> From: 	w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org on behalf of Frank Tobin
> Sent: 	Tuesday, December 19, 2000 9:29 PM
> To: 	Jamie Mackay
> Cc: 	w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: 	Re: Is AAA possible?
> 
> Jamie Mackay, at 14:44 +1300 on Wed, 20 Dec 2000, wrote:
> 
>     
>     I was wondering if there is such a thing as an AAA rated site which
> uses
>     images and for which the CSS code is viewable? I feel the need for
> some
>     'real world' examples...
> 
> It's quite possible that AAA is unfeasible using today's tools (read: way
> too much human effort is needed to create a AAA site to make it reasonable
> to do).  W3C's front page itself only claims AA accessibility.  I suggest
> that you shoot for only A or AA for the time being; these are much more
> reasonable goals, and do, in general, indiate a good deal of
> accessibility.
> 
> Given the extremeness of AAA, it's quite possible that the current notion
> of it will die out in favor of a new technology approach, in which case
> all your efforts into getting to the extremality will be for nought.  In
> my opinion, it's better to apply the same effort to getting some better
> level of accessibility in all places, since the less extreme the solution
> is, the more likely it will be eventually fully adopted.
> 
> -- 
> Frank Tobin		http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 20 December 2000 09:29:21 UTC