W3C

Edit comment LC-1216 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-1212 Next: LC-858

Comment LC-1216
:
Commenter: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>

or
Resolution status:

This clause is overly restrictive. The authors appear to be fixated on people writing public policy for the public web. There are other use cases which support cherry-picking requirements with full selectivity.

One of these use cases is where a web development organization is subcontracting for media fragments -- icons and background images or the like -- from a subcontractor and writes a standard for acceptable data packages which requires metadata to go with each including provenance, sample ALT text, etc. In this case there is no reason that the customer organization should have to require all of Level A on the piece parts purchased from the subcontractor -- the purchasor will take care of the other aspects before putting the assembled web content out on the web. This requirement as now stated would make that a violation of the Recommendation.

Proposed Change:

Soften the language from an imperative to a Recommendation.

Don't say "you mustn't cite arbitrary subsets," but rather say "if you cite only a subset of the Level 1 Success Criteria, don't represent this as WCAG 2.0 Conformance."

-- alternate wording...

W3C does not regard satisfying a profile of success criteria that does not contain all the Level One success criteria to merit the term "conformance to WCAG 2.0"

Unless a specification or policy requires at least conformance to all Level 1 Success Criteria, do not represent that policy or specification as implementing WCAG 2.0 conformance.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)


Developed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org).
$Id: 1216.html,v 1.1 2017/08/11 06:41:20 dom Exp $
Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to w3t-sys.org