- From: Jesper Tverskov <jesper.tverskov@mail.tele.dk>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:53:45 +0200
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Details are often revealing. In WCAG-1 abbr and acronym were priority 3, http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#gl-abbreviated-and-foreign, and this impossible guideline could safely be disregarded by most web content authors. In the proposal for WCAG-2 abbr and acronym are suddenly promoted to being "Level 1 Success Criteria for Guideline 3.1", http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-20040730/#meaning. *** Does this mean that every web content author now has to markup abbreviations and acronyms just to get near the "Level 1 Success Criteria"? This is not going to win WCAG many new friends. In spring I published an article called, "ABBR and ACRONYM are for user agents not for end users ", www.smackthemouse.com/20040108. The problem is that I, the supposed "expert", no matter how mediocre, don't understand the "Level 1 Success Criteria for Guideline 3.1", the wording: "The meaning of abbreviations and acronyms can be programmatically located." More details of the old impossible WCAG-1 sort can be found in "HTML Techniques for WCAG 2.0", 5.1 and 5.2. Some progress made in the old draft for WCAG 2.0, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-WCAG20-20030624/#acronym-abbr-def, seems to have been abandoned? The new proposal for WCAG-2 has a problem if it is too difficult to understand. Best regards, Jesper Tverskov www.smackthemouse.com
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2004 10:53:43 UTC