WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Implementing WCAG 2.0 (was: Scaleable fonts for Priority 2 WAI guidelines)

for

From: Christophe Strobbe
Date: May 15, 2008 10:20AM

Hi Steve,

At 17:38 15/05/2008, you wrote:
>Perhaps I should have caveated that comment. Yes, if you're designing
>websites for your own use or for your employer, then by all means implement
>WCAG 2.0 now on the understanding that you may need to do some rework later.
>
>If you're designing for external clients I don't think it's appropriate to
>be working to guidelines that have not yet reached W3C Recommendation
>status.

Thank you for that clarification.
However, Mike Cherim has already implemented WCAG 2.0 on a website for
an external client: see <http://green-beast.com/blog/?p=221>;.


>I assume that the process of attaining Proposed Recommendation and
>W3C Recommendation is not just a rubber stamp job and that there is
>therefore the possibility of change.

Indeed, implememtation evidence is not optional but *required* in order
to exit the CR stage:
the exit criteria require at least 10 conforming websites
(more details at <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-WCAG20-20080430/#status_exit>;).

>If there is no possibility of change,
>what would be the purpose of those extra stages?

Some success criteria have been defined as being "at risk"; see
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-WCAG20-20080430/#status_risk>;.
Depending on implementation feedback, some success criteria may
become less restrictive, revert to an earlier version, or
become advisory (i.e. they would become advisory techniques
instead of success critera).

In the past, some candicate recommendations have been pushed back
to the working draft stage. For example, CSS 2.1 was a candidate
recommendation in February 2004
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-CSS21-20040225/>;,
went back to working draft in 2005
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CSS21-20050613/>;,
and is now again a candidate recommendation:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/CR-CSS21-20070719/>;.

Best regards,

Christophe


>Steve
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
>[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Christophe
>Strobbe
>Sent: 15 May 2008 09:47
>To: WebAIM Discussion List
>Subject: [WebAIM] Implementing WCAG 2.0 (was: Scaleable fonts for Priority 2
>WAI guidelines)
>
>Hi Steve,
>
>
>At 16:39 14/05/2008, you wrote:
> >WCAG 2.0 has not been officially released. It is merely a Candidate
> >Recommendation, and won't become a Proposed Recommendation till 31
> >August 2008. There will be a further delay before it reaches the final
> >stage and becaomes a W3C Recommendation.
> >
> >In all probability it won't change much between now and then but it
> >reached Candidate Recommendation status before about two years ago,
> >after which it was substantially rewritten.
>
>WCAG 2.0 has never been a Candidate Recommendation before April 2008.
>What you are referring to is the last call working draft of April 2006:
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-20060427/complete.html>;.
>(There was another last call working draft in December 2007:
><http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20071211/>;. It is not unusual to go
>through two last calls; the process has become much heavier since WCAG 1.0
>was released in 1999.)
>
>
> >By all means learn about WCAG 2.0 but it's premature to be talking
> >about implementing it.
>
>On the contrary. Candidate Recommendation is a call for implementations.
>See <http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/CR/>;.
>Implementations are needed WCAG 2.0 to move to Proposed Recommendation; it
>needs to be shown that WCAG 2.0 can be implemented.
>Stating that it is premature to implement WCAG 2.0 is a self-fulfilling
>prophecy that hinders the progress of WCAG 2.0 to W3C Recommendation.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Christophe Strobbe
>
>
> >Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Paul Collins
> >Sent: 14 May 2008 15:19
> >To: WebAIM Discussion List
> >Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Scaleable fonts for Priority 2 WAI guidelines
> >
> >Thanks Rahul, that is a big help. I was refering to WCAG 1.0, I just
> >realised WCAG 2.0 has been officially released! You could still use
> >sIFR for
> >1.4.5 thought, right? Just that you have the option to use images as well.
> >
> >Better start learning the new rules then...
> >
> >Thanks again for your help.
> >Paul




---
Please don't invite me to LinkedIn, Facebook, Quechup or other
"social networks". You may have agreed to their "privacy policy", but
I haven't.

--
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
Research Group on Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/


Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm