Re: The Problem with WCAG (was RE: CSS Techniques for WCAG 2.0)

We need to remember, we are writing guidelines and not standards.  I know
you object to guidelines in general, but without them, there would be no
guidance for pollicy and standards.  Guidelines are the first steps towards
standards and part of what we have to deal with is the changing technology
so writing them in stone would not serve the greater purpose.

Johnnie Apple Seed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "RUST Randal" <RRust@COVANSYS.com>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 8:54 AM
Subject: The Problem with WCAG (was RE: CSS Techniques for WCAG 2.0)



Patrick Lauke wrote:

> Again, because WCAG is more than just a set of technical
> specs relating to syntax, whose validity can be verified
> programmatically, checking for accessibility will always
> require interpretation by (hopefully) knowledgeable
> individuals. Coupled with the huge number of possible "real
> world" scenarios, there will always be certain gray areas.
> Maybe we need a lot more best practice examples, but at the
> core I don't think it will be possible (or easy anyway) to
> pin all the points down for definite.

This is precisely the problem with WCAG, in any version. It is too
ambiguous. If the guidelines were all clear, such as using ALT
attributes, they would be more widely understood, accepted and
practiced.

It needs to get away from ludicrous requirements that require content to
be comprehensible -- because that's not a measurable guideline.
Therefore it should simply be left up to the developer or designer. Why
does WCAG bother mentioning something like that at all? It just creates
confusion.

----------
Randal Rust
Covansys Corp.
Columbus, OH

Received on Thursday, 19 August 2004 13:35:02 UTC