- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 11:21:31 -0400
- To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
- CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org, w3-wai-cg@w3.org
Jon Gunderson wrote: > > I have send Judy Brewer an e-mail about the conformance issue. I think > that WAI as a group needs to decide how people will use verify conformance. The following responses are my opinions: > 1. Will it be left up to developers themselves? I think developers should be able to make conformance claims. > 2. Will consumers be able to evaulate independently? I think consumers should be able to make conformance claims. > 3. Should there be a group that validates claims of conformance? Setting up a third-party agency (or several) to verify conformance might be useful, notably if the agency gave feedback about the usability of the guidelines, errata, etc. I doubt W3C has the resources to serve as an agency itself, though it should be responsive to questions from rating agencies (as part of life-after-Rec). Labels and rating systems suggests using PICS for implementing solutions (refer to rating systems [1]). - Ian [1] http://www.w3.org/PICS/raters.htm > At 10:11 PM 10/3/99 -0400, Ian Jacobs wrote: > >Hello, > > > >In my review of NN 4.6 [1] and from other reviews, > >it is apparent that some of the checkpoints cannot be > >verified by mere mortals; developer documentation or > >assistance is required. In particular, the following > >information is difficult to ascertain without detailed > >specs: > > > > 1) Does the UA support all functionalities through a given > > input or output device API? > > 2) Does the UA support a spec (W3C or other) 100%? Vendor claims > > are often exaggerated. > > 3) What information is made available through software APIs? > > (user interface controls, document object model, etc.) > > 4) If it's possible to control the UA through an API, how is this > > done? > > > >I propose that we include a Note in the document warning readers > >that some of the checkpoints will be difficult to verify without > >details from developers. For instance, in the section on Conformance, > >we might say: > > > ><BLOCKQUOTE> > >Note. While the checkpoints have been designed to be verifiable, some > >may be difficult to verify without documentation from vendors about > >what features and APIs they support. > ></BLOCKQUOTE> > > > > - Ian > > > >[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/uagl-checklist-nn4.60 > >-- > >Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs > >Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814 > >Cell: +1 917 450-8783 > > Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP > Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology > Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group > Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services > University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign > 1207 S. Oak Street > Champaign, IL 61820 > > Voice: 217-244-5870 > Fax: 217-333-0248 > E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu > WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund > http://www.w3.org/wai/ua > http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 4 October 1999 11:21:59 UTC