W3C logo Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) logo > EOWG Home Page > Standards Harmonization

Change Log: Why Standards Harmonization is Essential for Web Accessibility

This page records change requests and changes made to the draft WAI Resource Page Why Standards Harmonization is Essential for Web Accessibility. Please send additions or corrections to wai-eo-editors@w3.org.

Last updated on $Date: 2006/03/11 22:52:14 $ by $Author: jbrewer $

Change requests from EOWG teleconference 10 March 2006

Change requests on table of "fragmentation drivers" and "reasons for harmonization":
  1. DONE [on standards restrictions] Consider clarifying the consequences more
  2. NOT DONE BUT SLIGHT CLARIFICATION [on local languages] Consider alternative to "allows" though not necessarily so far as "encourages"
  3. DONE [on but it's worldwide] Add something like "...and is supported by the same kinds of assistive technologies" 
  4. DONE [on single country] Change myth to belief, to avoid casting negative tone
  5. TRIED; HOW ABOUT FOR A LATER VERSION? [somewhere?] Look for place to add language refering to the fact that developers are communicating with the whole world, not just the local audience -- but recognize that some developers aren't interested in the broader audience
  6. DONE [unified market] Clarify the leveraging effect more; not coming through
  7. DONE Also [editor's note] check consistency of how refering to standards harmonization throughout the document
  8. DONE Complete copyedits [editor's note: heavily copyedited the first subsection of "current situation"]
  9. DONE Also [editor's note] re-synchronize the new table text with the linearized version of the table.
  10. DONE Add WAI-TIES link/acknowledgement.
  11. Also [editor's note] set up/send out survey form, w/ explanatory email.

Change requests from EOWG f2f meeting 2 March 2006

  1. DONE bold "stds harmonisation" in para 1 overview
  2. DONE bold "a consistent international set of technical standards for accessibility"
  3. DONE breakout (and try bolding) web content etc to a list
  4. USED THE SOLUTION ABOVE try the following edit: "This document uses "standards harmonization" to refer to the adoption of a consistent international set of technical standards for web accessibility. Technical standards for web accessibility refer to content, browsers and media players; authoring tools used to develop Web content, and the accessibility of the authoring tools themselves."
  5. DONE BUT CHECK ACCESSIBILITY try presenting as a table of driver and answer - and shorter / more concise
  6. USED DIFFERENT LEAD-IN also try a better intro sentence - maybe talking about "misconceptions that have contributed to ..."
  7. DONE add something to resource section, as preface before policy links, such as: "While governmental laws and policies naturally will differ according to local needs, it is still possible to refer, within governmental policies, to a consistent set of international technical standards... see the following documents for examples of different ways that this can be done."
  8. DONE add "Similarly, organizational policies, while necessarily differing according to the circumstances of the org, can still reference a common set of technical guidelines"
  9. DONE add in references to wcag and atag 2.0
  10. DONE stress more that it is a *world*wide*web and the rest of the world is looking at your material
  11. NOT THE KEY PRIORITY Under Abstract consider including something along the lines of ".. and calls for wider (or greater) participation and cooperation for developing a single set of standards."
  12. DONE In the first sentence under Overview, should semicolons be replaced with commas? Or present the items in a list?
  13. NOT DONE; IT'S ALREADY A LIST Same comment applies to Action Steps.
  14. NOT DONE; UNNECESSARY AND WORDY I suppose Consequences (h2 heading) is part of Current situation (which is also h2). For clarity, better to say Consequences of fragmentation?
  15. DONE After stating what is meant by fragmentation upfront under overview, it may be better to drop the words
    "Different types of modifications" under current situation and begin directly with "Fragmentation of Web accessibility guidelines"

Additional changes made 1 March 2006 to http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/standard-harmon-20060301.html

Change requests from EOWG survey in May 2004

  1. [DONE] last 2 bullets under "current situation" are not parallel; fix
  2. [DONE] explain "evaluation tools"
  3. [DONE] typo -- extra "g" in step 5
  4. [DONE] under organizations, explain "sector" e.g "economic sector"
  5. [DONE] under consequences, change "web developers" to "web development" for parallel structure
  6. [CONFIRM - ADD WHEN MOVE TO NOTE FORMAT IN FUTURE, AND RESEARCH FORMER CONSTRIBUTORS]  list specific acknowledgements
  7. [FIXED DIFFERENTLY] replace "for" with "of" I think the last two "for"s should be "of"s in: "In this document "standards harmonization" refers to the adoption of unified international standards for accessibility of Web content, for authoring tools used to develop Web sites, and for user agents including browsers and media players." As is, it states that there should be unified standards but does not include for accessibility: "In this document "standards harmonization" refers to the adoption of unified international standards for accessibility of Web content, [the adoption of unified international standards] for authoring tools used to develop Web sites, and [the adoption of unified international standards] for user agents including browsers and media players." I think what is meant is standards for accessibility: "In this document "standards harmonization" refers to the adoption of unified international standards for accessibility of Web content, [the adoption of unified international standards for accessibility] _of_ authoring tools used to develop Web sites, and [the adoption of unified international standards for accessibility] _of_ user agents including browsers and media players." corrected would be: "In this document "standards harmonization" refers to the adoption of unified international standards for accessibility of Web content, of authoring tools used to develop Web sites, and of user agents including browsers and media players."
  8. [DONE] guidelines plural, techniques lower case "There is sometimes discomfort with a guideline not developed locally, yet WAI guidelines have been developed with input from many countries around the world." Guideline singular is awkward here - recommend making it plural "guidelines" "W3C continues to update and refine the WAI guidelines and supporting Techniques documents and" Techniques should be lowercase to match lowercase guidelines used throughout - because here it refers to multiple documents, not a specific document.
  9. reality checks for credibility
  10. tweaking
  11. [DONE] Editor missing. Add "Editor: Judy Brewer" at bottom?
  12. [DECLINE, SEEMS UNLIKELY] "For Web developers... development of accessible Web sites first requires... a deliberate effort to apply WCAG 1.0." Someone might argue against the assertion that developing accessibility Web sites _requires_ WCAG1.0.
  13. [DONE, DIFFERENT EDIT] grammar & word correction "Assist in preparing authorized translations of WAI guidelines (once authorized standards policy goes into effect).g" Should it be: "(once THE authorized TRANSLATIONS policy goes into effect)." ?
  14. [EDITED DIFFERENTLY] Authoring tools The last paragraph is properly written as subjunctive -- don't we wish AT [editor -- AT= authoring tools here] were followed! My wistful thinking/diatribe: The excuse/alibi that AT evolution awaits WCAG 2.0 is getting stale, given that WCAG 1.0 [editor: ATAG 1.0?] has been generally ignored. The long development cycle for changing AT is also, as newer releases aren't much improved in the tools I've tried to use.
  15. [EDITED] Action Steps 5. unclear ...(once authorized ?translation? standards policy goes into effect) XgX I find "Translating WAI Documents" http://www.w3.org/WAI/translation.html which might be mentioned under related resources below.
  16. [CONFIRM-EMPH on POLICY LINKS? EDITED FOR NEW RESOURCES] Related Resources I believe it needs a pointer to where in WAI to find the guidelines referenced throughout. WAI Resources: Guidelines http://www.w3.org/WAI/Resources/#gl

Change requests for next version

Change log and requests from 14 May 2004

Change log and requests from 7 May 2004

Changes made:
New change requests:

Change requests from 2 March 2004

browsers ... section

action steps

other sections

Change requests from 27 February 2004

Change requests from 13 February 2004

Change requests from 19 December 2003

[RECONFIRM? following items are not yet agreed to]

Change requests from 31 October 2003 [all done or accounted for]

General

Beginning

Authoring Tools Section

Change requests from 10 October 2003 [all done]

Change requests from 3 October 2003 [some done]

  1. [PLACEHOLDER] Add in section on User Agent accessibility guidelines
  2. [DONE] Better align the introduction with the content of the document once user agent material is in there.
  3. [PLACEHOLDER] For user agent section (or elsewhere?), consider incorporating something on designing to different browsers as some of the context for other sources of fragmentation in the past.
  4. [PLACEHOLDER] Add in specific examples of divergent guidelines: For instance, note that in such & such an area, requirements differ on such & such checkpoints or provisions, and then trace through implications onto the authoring tool itself and trace through to the assessment tools.
  5. [PLACEHOLDER] Consider somehow addressing issue of WCAG 1.0 and 2.0 differences and transition in the "current status" section.
  6. [GAVE IT A SEPARATE SECTION INSTEAD] Include the benefits towards assistive technology both in pwd section and in user agent section.
  7. [PLACEHOLDER] Add a separate section just on assistive technology --- assistive technology needs to be at the same level as user agents and authoring tools.
  8. [WHAT WAS THIS???] Careful about conformance levels being considered standards in some places; overall, the document needs some orientation to the terms used.
  9. [PLACEHOLDER] Focus more on what can be done rather than a negative litany, and provide more explicit suggestions to encourage individuals and organization in and outside of W3C to comment ... 
  10. [DONE] Remove the suite nav (and fix the stylesheet bug)
  11. [DONE] Shorten text in section -- too verbose.  A 50% text reduction would be nice ...
  12. [DONE] Reinforce the emphasis in the document on the authoring tool role in moving from "piecemeal" to "wholesale" change
  13. [DONE] Move current status much nearer the top of the document
  14. [DONE] Shorten subheadings 

Change requests from 26 September 2003

Comments are from 26 September 2003 EOWG teleconference discussion of 26 September version of Why Standards Harmonization is Essential for Web Accessibility.

Copyright   ©  1994-2006 W3C (MIT , ERCIM , Keio ), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark , document use and software licensing rules apply. Your interactions with this site are in accordance with our public and Member privacy statements.