- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 18:48:26 -0500
- To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Shawn Lawton Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Cc: "Phill Jenkins" <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, wai-wcag-editor@w3.org, wai-liaison@w3.org
Judy, I think that Shawn might get somewhere with this idea. Can we get her to lightly approach the Access Board staff on the idea of a comparative analysis -- with the benefit of hindsight -- that we can both stand behind? I was very pleased that the briefings that Ken and I worked up on complex tables turned out to be telling the same story. Neither organization has anything to gain from public differences about interpreting one another's documents. And introducing a new face can let history be history. Al At 05:58 PM 2003-03-26, Phill Jenkins wrote [on w3c-wai-ig]: >I would also publically ask that the W3C WAI publish their view of the >differences between the Web part of the 508 technical standard and WCAG >1.0. Better yet would be a joint document from both the Access Board and >WAI that they both agree on. I would recommend NOT including any >discussion of the policy stuff, i.e., conformance vs compliance, since W3C >does not really produce policy documents. > >What the Access-Board has published that Larry Hull quoted is an excellent >start. I also have an internal IBM version that I could contribute. The >Web Content Guidelines Working Group (GL) also needs to publish a >comparison for the next public draft of WCAG 2.0 > >Regards, >Phill Jenkins >IBM Research Division - Accessibility Center >11501 Burnet Rd, Austin TX 78758 http://www.ibm.com/able
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2003 19:04:52 UTC