Capturing questions and concerns about conformance approaches #326
Replies: 5 comments
-
Approach: Foundational plus percentages
Note that this is a % of the total number of possible supplemental requirements and assertions not the number of instances they apply. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Approach: Foundational plus pointsBronze = Foundational requirements and supplemental requirements and assertions equal to a number of points |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Approach: Foundational plus sets of requirements and assertionsBronze = Foundational requirements and supplemental requirements and assertions based on sets (these might be recommended based on content type or intended audience) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Approach: FoundationalBronze = Foundational Requirements only. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This is a comment from myself and not my employer. Conformance should be made as simple as possible. If we are to introduce a point system then is AG and W3C responsible for grading or are your reliant on self reporting and third party auditors? Overall goal is for adoption and to avoid gamification. If requirements are required, then they aren't supplemental. I'm not following how you can have a requirement that is supplemental. Terminology definitions are key here. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
The goal of this thread is to document the concerns about each conformance approach being discussed in July. I've listed the approaches as comments below.
Please do the following:
For purposes of this discussion, I have used Bronze to mean the lowest level of conformance though AG is still exploring that.
Note This is not covering the scope of elements being tested, only the levels of the conformance.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions