W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: quick wacg 2.0 question?

From: CAE-Vanderhe <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:57:58 -0500
Cc: IG - WAI Interest Group List list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4FF068E2-D6EA-49DD-BCCB-FE2A3D8A0DEE@cae.wisc.edu>
To: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>
There is no rule in WCAG 2.0 that requires browser agnocity

the only Rules in WCAG  are the Success Criteria and the Conformance Criteria
see  http://w3.org/TR/WCAG20


Also note that WCAG does NOT include everything needed to make a site usable by people with disabilities
FIRST - a site must be usable in the first place.  But WCAG only focuses on things that are particular to people with disabilities  or disproportionately affects them.  Things that discriminate.   So an unusable site will be unusable to people with disabilities - but WCAG does not comment on that.   Only on things that make a usable site unusable by people with disabilities.  
SECOND -  WCAG is a measuring stick that provides minimum levels of accessibility.  But you can pass all of WCAG (even level AAA) and there will still be people who cannot use your site.   In fact it is impossible to make a site that is usable by EVERY type, degree and combination of disability.   A point proof would be a person who was  deaf, blind, completely paralyzed and profoundly intellectually impaired.     But you do not need to go to that extreme to find people who cannot use many of our sites, no matter how hard we try to make them accessible. 
So the goal is to make things as accessible as possible and to pass as many levels of WCAG as possible (and as many provisions AND ADVISORY TECHNIQUES as you can beyond the level you can (or are required to ) meet. 

Making content work across browsers is of course a good idea.    A Great idea.    And best practice.   But it is not a requirement in WCAG 2.0


Gregg


On Jun 15, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
> I have several posts over the time I have been here pointing out that true wacg 2.0 guidelines specify that a site should be browser agnostic.  Can anyone direct me to the specific rule where this language is used?
> Thanks,
> Karen
> 
Received on Sunday, 15 June 2014 23:58:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:51 UTC