RE: WCAG formalization (rewriting WCAG HTML techniques as automatable rules)

Vicente Luque Centeno wrote:

<blockquote>
In order to have better WCAG rules for automated tools, I recently published [1]. They are just a set of XPath/XQuery based expressions that rewrite WCAG in a more automatable and less fuzzy way.

Now I have upgrade those rules to WCAG 2.0, and I have published them at [2] (plus some comments). I would be pleased to receive your comments/feedback. It would be nice to have no misinterpretation on WCAG (we would not have different tools' interpretations). I also think that these rules + a XQuery engine + some preferences for personalizing subjectivity + some little integration code could be enough to build an accessibility evaluation tool.
</blockquote>

Thank you very much for this effort.   Please be aware, however, that WCAG 2.0 is *not* a formal W3C Recommendation.  It is very much a work in progress and the guidelines and success criteria are subject to change.  It is not appropriate to treat the current working draft (http://www.w3.org/tr/wcag20) as a normative document.

Experiments like yours may help the WCAG Working Group identify places where we need to clarify our success criteria.

John Slatin


The current 

"Good design is accessible design"
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Senior Accessibility Specialist
RampWEB, Inc.
phone +1.512.266.6189 email jslatin@rampweb.com
www.rampweb.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Vicente Luque Centeno
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 8:55 AM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: WCAG formalization (rewriting WCAG HTML techniques as automatable rules)



Hi all,

In order to have better WCAG rules for automated tools, I recently published [1]. They are just a set of XPath/XQuery based expressions that rewrite WCAG in a more automatable and less fuzzy way.

Now I have upgrade those rules to WCAG 2.0, and I have published them at [2] (plus some comments). I would be pleased to receive your comments/feedback. It would be nice to have no misinterpretation on WCAG (we would not have different tools' interpretations). I also think that these rules + a XQuery engine + some preferences for personalizing subjectivity + some little integration code could be enough to build an accessibility evaluation tool.

Thanks.

[1] http://www.www2005.org/cdrom/docs/p1146.pdf
[2] http://www.it.uc3m.es/vlc/wai/wcag20formal.html

Vicente Luque Centeno
Dep. Ingeniería Telemática
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
http://www.it.uc3m.es/vlc

Received on Sunday, 29 May 2005 20:52:42 UTC