- From: Gautier Barrere <barrere@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 15:18:34 +0200
- To: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>
- Cc: Peter Krantz <peter.krantz@gmail.com>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2011 13:19:08 UTC
Hi there, In luxembourg we have ReNo (Référentiel de Normalisation). This is the quality approach for gov luxembourgish websites. We did 2 years ago a differential between WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 Hope it'll help. PS: by the way, Shawn (Henry), if you see that email, I'm still interested in getting the W3C feedback :) Best, Gautier On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au> wrote: > Hi Peter > > You can find information on Australia's approach at > http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/wcag-2-implementation/ > > You can also email the Governments accessibility team at > WCAG2@finance.gov.au > > Cheers > > Chris Beer > > On 31/03/2011, at 22:17, Peter Krantz <peter.krantz@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > We are working on implementing WCAG 2 in our national web guidelines > > for public sector websites. The guidelines encompass more than > > accessibility (user centric development process requirements, minority > > language law requirements, various technical stuff). > > > > I would be grateful for information on other national web guidelines > > and how they have incorporated WCAG 2. As a portal requirement for a > > specific level? Or did you implement a subset only (as indicated in [1])? > > > > Was it a successful approach? > > > > Regards, > > > > Peter Krantz > > Sweden > > > > [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/appendixA.html > > > >
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2011 13:19:08 UTC