Disposition of comments raised during third last call of UAAG
1.0
9 April
2001 (last call) UAAG 1.0 | Last
call announcement | Issues
list | UAWG home
page
Status of this document
This document indicates the disposition of comments raised
during the third last call of UAAG 1.0 (the 9 April
2001 draft). This document has been prepared by the User Agent
Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (UAWG) as part of a request
to advance to Candidate Recommendation.
The following list consists of a link to the formal response from
the UAWG to each last call reviewer, followed by links (when
available) to acknowledgments from the reviewer.
-
Reply to AOL,
acknowledgement from AOL
-
Reply to Mark Novak,
acknowledgement from Mark
-
Reply to Tantek Celik (Microsoft/Mac IE),
acknowledgement from Tantek,
later acknowledgement on specific issue.
-
Reply to Adobe. Adobe comments have been subsumed by the SVG WG
comments.
-
Reply to Sun,
acknowledgement from Sun
-
Reply to HTML WG,
acknowledgement from HTML WG
-
Reply to Opera,
acknowledgement from Opera
-
Reply to RealNetworks,
acknowledgement from RealNetworks. RealNetworks did not
express total agreement, but registered no objections.
-
Reply to SVG WG.
The Chair of the SVG WG confirmed on behalf of the SVG
WG that UAWG should request to advance to CR at the UAWG's
30 August teleconference, despite the fact
that a formal acknowledgement had not yet been sent by the SVG
WG. A link will be added to the SVG WG acknowledgement
when it has been received..
The following objections have been carried forward to Candidate
Recommendation:
- From
Gregory Rosmaita: The priority of checkpoint 12.1 which
requires at a Priority 1 level that at least one version of the
user agent documentation conforms to at least Level Double-A of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. Gregory believes the
checkpoint should require Triple-A WCAG 1.0 conformance at a P1
level:
- From
IBM: IBM believes that Level Double-A WCAG conformance should
not be required if the checkpoint is only P1. One counter-proposal
is a relative checkpoint priority (as is found in ATAG 1.0).
- From
Opera: Opera objects to the mandatory DOM core requirement for
XML and HTML content. Opera feels that this should be optional for
conformance.
Last modified: $Date: 2001/08/31 16:13:22 $