- From: <josh@interaccess.ie>
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:26:29 +0000
- To: "Gian Wild" <gian@accessibilityoz.com>, "David MacDonald" <david100@sympatico.ca>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "w3c WAI List" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <em99ea5538-3602-4c00-9df3-de4cfc2c4d40@josh_machine>
------ Original Message ------ From: "Gian Wild" <gian@accessibilityoz.com> [...] >That is an absolutely FANTASTIC idea!! > I think this is a good idea, and would no have no objection. Thanks Josh > > > >-- > > > >Gian Wild, CEO > >AccessibilityOz > > > >Email:gian@accessibilityoz.com > >Mobile (Australia): 042 442 6262 > >Cell (United States): (206) 701 6363 > > > >Offices: > >United States: (415) 621 9366 > >Canberra: (02) 6108 3689 > >Melbourne: (03) 8677 0828 > >Brisbane: (07) 3041 4011 > > > >From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca] >Sent: Tuesday, 26 April 2016 12:55 PM >To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; w3c WAI List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> >Subject: Let's add an approved date field to Failures and Techniques > > > >I think we have a problem introducing failures that we will have > >to address in WCAG.NEXT. I would like to propose a solution. > >===Problem=== >WCAG was created to be an ever green document. The SCs are not >technology dependent, non normative techniques and failures, can be >created to address new realities that we see on the ground as the web >develops. This has happened for techniques, but not failures. We have >created about 150 new techniques since 2008, and only *3* (three) >failures. > >It is not from a lack of failure proposals, there have been plenty in >8 years. However, it is almost impossible to gain consensus on a >failure, because there are always a some voices that will not want to >tighten things up, for various reasons, some of them I would agree >with in some situations. Here are the main reasons its hard to pass a >failure: > >1) Fear that it changes the requirements of WCAG >2) If not, a fear that there is a *percieved* change to WCAG >3) Fear that pages that once passed will not pass after a new common >failure is introduced. > >====Solution===== >Id' like to propose an "Approved date" field, to techniques and >failures, which would be populated when we gained consensus on a >technique or failure. This will give jurisdictions a tool to exempt >failures that were created after a site was built. > > > > > >Cheers, >David MacDonald > > > >CanAdapt Solutions Inc. > >Tel: 613.235.4902 > >LinkedIn > >twitter.com/davidmacd > >GitHub > >http://www.can-adapt.com/ > > > > Adapting the web to all users > > Including those with disabilities > > > >If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2016 11:25:13 UTC