Item Number: Conformance claims
Part of Item:
Comment Type: GE
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
Re: Conformance notes.
The Note suggests that the default version of the content displayed (i.e. Web unit that is returned when no negotiation is conducted) is the one that must comply. This would mean that myself for example, as a fully able user with no content negotiation enabled, would be forced to view the most accessible version of a content unit, despite, perhaps, a less accessible, more interactive, "flashy" version being more appropropriate for my needs.
I think the second statement (in parentheses) "...one of the negotiated forms must comply" makes more sense as the default here, with perhaps the added note that "...the most accessible version is easily accessed should the primary version not be accessible". A common example is the Flash splash page that includes a link to an accessible HTML version of the same content. In the initial statement it suggested that as a developer I would have to default to the HTML version of the page, with a link to the Flash version instead. Developers and their clients will not agree to this, but they will agree to a link that leads to a more accessible version..
We have removed discussion of content negotiation and moved requirements related to alternate versions to the Conformance section of the Guidelines. The revised conformance criteriaon now reads:
Alternate Versions: If the Web page does not meet all of the success criteria for a specified level, then a mechanism to obtain an alternate version that meets all of the success criteria can be derived from the nonconforming content or its URI, and that mechanism meets all success criteria for the specified level of conformance. The alternate version does not need to be matched page for page with the original (e.g. the alternative to a page may consist of multiple pages). If multiple language versions are available, then conforming versions are required for each language offered.