Edit comment LC-1020 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-1031 Next: LC-1032

Comment LC-1020: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Gian Sampson-Wild <gian@tkh.com.au>; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Resolution status:
Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter; Response status:
No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):; Comment:
Issues with commenting - It is difficult to accurately comment on WCAG2 when the documents that are needed to understand WCAG2 are not normative and are not complete. For example, one cannot interpret a SC without referring to techniques, yet these are not normative. There has been a lot of people saying WCAG2 is difficult to understand, yet they cannot rely on the UW or TD documents as these are neither normative or complete. The WG could vote to significantly change these documents, thereby significantly changing the meaning of particular success criteria, without ever allowing comments from the public. In a perfect world neither the UW or TD documents would be required in order to understand WCAG2 but taking into account the difficulty most people are having with interpreting WCAG2, these documents are becoming mandatory reading.

Proposed Change:

Allow for a subsequent 'Last Call' when all documents are complete, and specify that WCAG2 must be read and interpreted in conjunction with UW and TD documents; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: [EDITORZ] Discussed in the 19 April 2007 telecon: resolution: accept as amended http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/04/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html {reject} Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2007Jun/0156.html; Resolution: In order to be technology neutral but accurate and testable the guidelines themselves need to be written in language that sometimes can be abstract or technical. We recognize that this can make them difficult to understand. We have spent much time trying to figure out how to make them as simple to understand as possible while keeping them accurate and clear. We have also been very careful to be sure that the guidelines themselves contain what is required. Information in the non-normative documents can never require anything that is not already required by the language in the normative document. Thus the guidelines can stand on their own in terms of 'interpretability'. However we have also created extensive support documentation to help make them easier to understand and to include examples and specific techniques for meeting them. The Understanding WCAG documents and techniques documents will continue to evolve because technologies and user agent support continue to evolve, so that new sufficient techniques can emerge as assistive technology and other user agent support improves over time. It is important that these documents remain non-normative so that they can be changed as our collective knowledge grows. It is very useful to read the ancillary documents to better understand the document. The ancillary materials may aid comprehension but are not in fact normative. The ancillary materials have been filled in since the time of the comment, and while not fully complete, are being republished at the same time in order to provide non-normative explanatory information to aid comprehension.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)