- From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 08:21:03 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
- CC: Roger Hudson <rhudson@usability.com.au>
On 9/4/2012 5:06 AM, Roger Hudson wrote: > ... > > However, on a wider point - I am becoming increasingly concerned by the > tendency to see Techniques as rules. Let us not forget, Techniques are > informative, whereas Principals, Guidelines and Success Criteria are > normative. Thanks for the reminder of this, Roger. As stated in a blog post earlier this year[1]: First, understand that the basis for determining conformance to WCAG 2.0 is the success criteria from the WCAG 2.0 standard — not the techniques. The Techniques document provides guidance that is "informative". You do not have to use the sufficient techniques to meet WCAG. Web content can use other ways to meet the WCAG success criteria. Web content could even fail a particular technique test, yet still meet WCAG a different way. Also, content that uses the published techniques does not necessarily meet all WCAG success criteria. To learn more about the techniques, please see: * About the Techniques section of How to Meet WCAG 2.0: A customizable quick reference... <http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#about-techs> * Sufficient and Advisory Techniques section of Understanding WCAG 2.0 <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/intro.html#introduction-layers-techs-head> Best, ~Shawn [1] http://www.w3.org/QA/2012/01/wcag_techniques_learn_more.html ----- Shawn Lawton Henry W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) e-mail: shawn@w3.org phone: +1.617.395.7664 about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 13:21:19 UTC