Re: AGENDA: W3C User Agent Teleconference 24 January 2002

At 01:40 PM 2002-01-24 , Ian B. Jacobs wrote:
>
> 
>> 4. UAAG vs. 508 comparison
>
>
>No progress here from my end. I am hoping that JG
>and I will have a chance to talk about an XML or
>RDF representation of relationships between the
>two documents. I would like two documents at
>some point:
>
>  a) "If you satisfy 508 requirements and these X
>      extra things, you can get UAAG 1.0 Level A
>      (for the following content types labels, etc.)."
>
>  b) "If you conform to UAAG 1.0 in the following way,
>      you also conform to 508 if you do these extra
>      things."
>
>I think that UAAG 1.0 and Section 508 are sufficiently
>different that documents a and b may be suprisingly
>different.
>

AG::

People are populating the template that describes how their products address
the 508 provisions.  If you want to think about what we really want we want
them to be able to publish one page that serves both questions.

So: a key report generator application is one that gathers these pages and
presents the information contained there appropriately for UAAG-driven queries.

One way to get a more robust engine is to kick ideas around in ER.  There is
technology and tool-building capability lurking there and susceptible to
recruiting for the right compliance assessment tasks.

And we should be coordinating with BuyAccessible at Section508.gov.  They want
to be able to treat the template-following pages that live on the Web as a
database, too.  If people should actually be putting these pages up in some
strict flavor of HTML for post-processing into the BuyAccessible database, it
will help 508.gov and it will help us.  Or they may have an XML or other
data-entry format for submission to the database that we can learn from.

Al

>  _ Ian
>
>-- 
>Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)  
<http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs>http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447
>

Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 15:38:36 UTC