Thread Subject: Action Item #2 - Definition of Web Page
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Li, Alex
Date: Wed, Aug 22 2007 5:10 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Action Item #2 - Definition of Web Page"
- Previous message in thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Action Item #2 - Definition of Web Page"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
Here's the problem with a defintion like that--almost anything is web
content. When we cast such a wide net. The term just does not mean
Let's look at two scenarios to illustrate the point that thing not
intended to be web content can end up becoming web content.
Scenario 1-I think an exe file posted for download can be classified as
web content as it stands. Obviously, it does not make common sense that
an exe file posted would be considered as web conent. Please correct me
if I'm wrong.
Another common scenario that may test our understanding is email. A
simple text-based email application is generally not considered a web
authoring tool. Nor is an email author normally considered a web
content author. But the email author may become a web content author
because the receiver of the email happens to use a web-based email as
sited in example 3. Today, WCAG 2 carve that out as partial conformance
because the web-mail application cannot control the incoming emails. I
don't think we should do the same in 508. Below is the text used in
WCAG 2 for partial conformance.
Statement of partial conformance
Sometimes, Web pages are created that will later have additional content
added to them. For example, an email program, a blog, an article that
allows users to add comments to the bottom, or applications supporting
user contributed content. Another example would be a page composed of
content aggregated from multiple contributors, such as in portals and
news sites. Sometimes, the content from the other sources is
automatically inserted into the page over time.
In both of these cases, it is not possible to know at the time of
original posting what the content of the pages will be. Two options are
1. A conformance claim is made based on best knowledge. If a page of
this type is monitored and kept conforming (non-conforming content is
immediately removed or made conforming) then a conformance claim can be
made since, except for error periods, the page conforms. No conformance
claim should be made if it is not possible to monitor or correct
non-conforming content; OR
2. A "statement of partial conformance" is made. A statement that the
page does not conform, but could conform if certain parts were removed
can be made. The form of that statement would be, "This page would
conform to WCAG 2.0 at level X if the following parts from uncontrolled
sources were removed."
a. The content that is excluded in the statement of partial
conformance cannot be content that is under the author's control.
b. The content that is excluded in the statement of partial
conformance would be described in terms that users can understand. (e.g.
they can't be described as "all parts that we do not have control of"
unless they are clearly marked as such.)
- Next message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Action Item #2 - Definition of Web Page"
- Previous message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Action Item #2 - Definition of Web Page"