- From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:28:04 -0500
- To: achuter.technosite@yahoo.com
- Cc: wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
Thanks, Alan! Related to this first bit: "From MWBP towards WCAG: If you have implemented MWBP 1.0 and are considering progressing to: - WCAG 2.0, then read From Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 - WCAG 1.0, then read From Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 " How about making the next bit similar in format, e.g.: "From WCAG towards MWBP: If you have implemented WCAG and are considering doing MWBP 1.0: - If you have done WCAG 2.0, then read From Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 to Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 - If you have done WCAG 1.0 then read From Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 to Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 " Also, I wonder if this wording like this is easier to process: >From mobile towards accessibility: For those who have implemented MWBP 1.0 and want to learn about - WCAG 2.0, see From MWBP 1.0 to WCAG 2.0 - WCAG 1.0, see From MWBP 1.0 to WCAG 1.0 >From accessibility towards mobile: If you have implemented WCAG and want to learn about MWBP 1.0: - If you have done WCAG 2.0, see From WCAG 2.0 to MWBP 1.0 - If you have done WCAG 1.0, see From WCAG 1.0 to MWBP 1.0 Alan Chuter wrote: > I have done a mock-up of the reorganised document [1]. There's no need > to read the overview document, the important ones are the MWBP to WCAG > [2] and WCAG to MWBP [3] pages. > > It is more user-oriented. This means that both BPs and SCs or CPs > appear in each document, but I think it's better that way. I've > included comments to emphasize the thinking behind each one. > > regards, > > Alan > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/restructure/Overview.html > [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/restructure/mwbp-wcag20.html > [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/restructure/wcag20-mwbp.html > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] >> On Behalf Of Alan Chuter >> Sent: 14 March 2008 17:34 >> To: EOWG; MWI BPWG Public >> Subject: Discussion on purpose of Mobile Accessibility document >> >> >> For those who were not on the call: It became apparent that something >> was very wrong with this page of the document [1]. There was no >> agreement on whether it was for going from MWBP to WCAG or the >> reverse. >> >> Following our discussion, and having stood back from the document for >> a while I realised what I believe is the problem is that the documents >> are structured around the mapping, not around what people are going to >> use it for. For each BP there are two paragraphs: >> >> 1. How does it especially help users with disabilities? >> 2. Does it help meet any WCAG 2.0 success criteria? >> >> While these appear to be slightly different takes on the same thing, I >> think that they are quite different >> >> 1. Is about the accessibility benefits of MWBP and the case for >> adopting from MWBP starting from WCAG (I've done WCAG, what is the >> accessibility justification for adopting some or all of MWBP?). From >> WCAG to MWBP. >> >> 2. Is about the work involved in adopting WCAG starting from MWBP >> (I've done MWBP, how much further do I have to go to comply with >> WCAG?) From WCAG to MWBP. >> >> So while the *mapping* is from MWBP to WCAG, the *use of the document* >> goes both ways. These two things should not be in the same document, I >> think. >> >> So at the cost of expanding from five pages to seven, and turning it >> inside out, I suggest splitting this up, so that we have: >> >> 1. Extending/Upgrading from WCAG to MWBP. >> * For each MWBP, the Accessibility Benefits of this BP (MWBP >> mapped to accessibility) >> * For each WCAG SC, does this WCAG SC that I have done give also >> me MWBP compliance? (WCAG mapped to MWBP) >> 2. Extending/Upgrading from WCAG to MWBP. >> >> Alan, #1 and #2 are the same. Did you mean one to be different from the other? >> >> * For each WCAG SC, the Mobile Benefits of this WCAG SC (WCAG >> mapped to MWBP) >> * For each MWBP, does this BP that I have done also give me WCAG >> SC compliance? (MWBP mapped to WCAG) >> >> I don't think that this will be as complicated as it seems, and will >> be easier to read. >> >> What worries me is that we've been looking at this for so long and not >> noticed what the problem. >> >> regards, >> >> Alan >> >> [1]http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Accessibility/drafts/ED-mwbp-wcag-20080305/mwbp-wcag20.html#MINIMIZE_KEYSTROKES >> >> >> -- >> Alan Chuter, >> Senior Web Accessibility Consultant, Technosite (www.technosite.es) >> Researcher, Inredis Project (www.inredis.es/) >> Email: achuter@technosite.es >> Alternative email: achuter.technosite@yahoo.com >> Blogs: www.blogger.com/profile/09119760634682340619 -- Shawn Lawton Henry, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/ phone: +1-617-395-7664 e-mail: shawn@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2008 21:28:55 UTC