W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2005

RE: 4.2 WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint

From: Mark D. Urban <docurban@nc.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 08:53:17 -0500
To: "'Gautier Barrere'" <barrere@gmail.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hi Gautier!
IMHO (In my Humble Opinion),
You have met the spirit, if not the letter, of the guideline.  Your second
example is technically more conforming to the Techniques document, but the
Guidelines themselves do not (except in specific areas) mandate the HTML
mechanism to be used in complying with WCAG.   
So - in my mind, if you are giving the definition of the acronym, then
noting the acronym, that is (at least in English) common usage.  It also
provides a definition the first time the acronym appears, as the guideline
requires. So my opinion is that you have met the requirement.
One question though - why are you opposed to adding the ACRONYM tag?
-Mark D. Urban 
919-395-8513 (cell)
Chair, North Carolina Governor's Advocacy Council for Persons with
Keep up with the latest in worldwide accessibility at

From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Gautier Barrere
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 5:50 AM
To: wai-ig
Subject: 4.2 WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint
Hi all !
I have a question concerning the 4.2 WCAG 1.0 checkpoint "Specify the
expansion of each abbreviation or acronym in a document where it first
What should I do if there is this sentence in my webpage :
<body> Welcome to the Dallas tennis association (DTA) <body>
Should I indicate again the expansion like following :
<body> Welcome to the Dallas tennis association <ACRONYM title="Dallas
tennis association">DTA</ACRONYM><body>
I think the first version is the better, the aim of the guideline is not to
provide redundant information.
Could you help me ?

Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2005 13:53:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:26 UTC