Edit comment LC-902 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-1266 Next: LC-1244

Comment LC-902: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Giorgio Brajnik <giorgio@dimi.uniud.it> on behalf of University of Udine, Italy; 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:
the def of user agents include assistive tech, and that is clear. But what do you mean with â€œ... as long as accessible user agents support the technologyâ€?? that a website useing a tech. not supported by any accessible user agent could never be claimed to be wcag20 conformant? also the clause â€œ...user agents including ATâ€? is confusing. If AT is already a user agent (or part of it), then the clause is not needed. But if you want to say that the technology should be supported by at least an accessible user agent that is compatible with at least one AT, you should say it clearly.; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: [TEAMA] [AL] The commenter points out that we should a have clearer line of thinking about user agent and baseline. There needs to be a clean decision if the author is responsible for determining if an â€œaccessible user agentâ€? exists for the baseline content or just to fulfill the sc of the baseline and not worry about user agent(s), particularly AT. Current language is unclear. Propose to remove language of "accessible user agent". It is a loaded term and highly contextual. Issue may be closed upon available of better baseline document. Discussed in the 08 February 2007 telecon: Resolution: close issue 902 as ammended http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/02/08-wai-wcag-minutes.html; Resolution: Yes, a website that relies upon technology that is not supported by any accessible user agent could not claim to be WCAG20 conformant. It could, however use non accessibility-supported technology as long as there was an alternate version that provides all of the same information and functionality. The guidelines often mention assistive technology explicitly when discussing user agent support because it is often crucial that the user agent provide support to assistive technology. This is spelled out explicitly in the definition of assistive technology in the glossary, but the working group thought it was important to highlight this. We have edited the guidelines to make it as clear as possible that the mention of assistive technology in this context is qualifying the preceding use of "user agent", not in addition to it.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)