Re: Conformance Issue in the UA group

At 10:11 AM 2000-08-14 -0500, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>Judy,
>I would like to include the discussion of a topic that was discussed in the 
>last UA telecon.  It relates to conformance to the UA guidelines.  In 
>trying to resolve issue 294: "Native support and downloadable 
>modules".  The discussion centers on the issue of whether accessibility 
>features needed for conformance to the UA guidelines need to be part of the 
>default configuration or the developer can claim conformance through use of 
>additional modules that are installed separately.  The specification of 
>additional modules would need to be part of any conformance claim.
>
[snip]

>I am interested in the CG thoughts and how other working groups have dealt 
>with similar issues.
>

AG::

The Web Content Guidelines group applied the broader approach to
conformance at times when they justified decisions by saying "It works with
Lynx, and Lynx is available free, so that is good enough."  It is not
necessary that the user have to expend zero effort to make the solution
work.  In "reasonable accomodation," 'reasonable' cuts both ways.  It is
not necessary for the UA builder to go to inordinate lengths to remove the
last iota of consumer difficulty.

Al

>Thanks,
>Jon
>
>
>
>
>Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
>Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
>Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
>MC-574
>College of Applied Life Studies
>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
>WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
>

Received on Tuesday, 15 August 2000 15:53:40 UTC