Last Call Working Draft of WCAG 2.0 published

On 27 April 2006, the W3C published a Last Call Working Draft of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0). In addition two supporting documents, also currently working drafts, were published: Understanding WCAG 2.0 and Techniques for WCAG 2.0.

The W3C is looking for comments on this Last Call Working Draft of WCAG 2.0. If you find any problematic areas in this document, submit your comments to make the working group aware of them. Don’t wait too long, since the deadline for submitting comments is 31 May 2006. After that date, WCAG 2.0 will move on to eventually become a referenceable recommendation. That will take some time though - at least six months according to the W3C.

To submit comments, you can either use the online comment form or use a downloadable file. More details are available in Instructions for Commenting on WCAG 2.0 Documents . You may also want to read the Overview of WCAG 2.0 Documents.

Comments

1. May 4, 2006 by Tomas Caspers

After that date, WCAG 2.0 will move on to become the recommendation that will replace WCAG 1.0

Not really. Last Call is only the second step in a 5-step process from Working Draft to Recommendation, so »Last Call« doesn't mean »Last Chance before it's done«. It's only that the Working Group assumes the document to be complete and stable. Note that the document may be sent back to Working Draft status at any point in the process if W3C's Director thinks that issues haven't been properly addressed.

2. May 4, 2006 by Stéphane Chausson

Or when the Accessibility guys don't make accessible sites.

With light on dark settings, that is the whole WAI section which is plagued by a missing color statement. I tried to mail them two monthes ago but got no reply.

Sad.

3. May 4, 2006 by Roger Johansson

Tomas: You're right, I should rephrase that sentence a bit.

Stéphane: Ouch. Odd that they don't reply or fix the problem.

4. May 4, 2006 by Tomas Caspers

Also, WCAG 2 will not really replace WCAG 1 (as in HTML 3.2 vs. 4). If I understand this correctly, version 1.0 will still be a referenceable document once 2.0 is out, in order to be able to make conformance claims for older content.

5. May 4, 2006 by Scott

Interesting to know more about how the whole process works, and very interesting to know that the general public can make comments. I thought only W3C people were able to have input.

Sorry, comments are closed for this post.

Information, sponsorship, and externals

About the author

Roger Johansson is a Swedish web professional specialising in web standards, accessibility, and usability. More about me and this site.

Subscribe

Looking for web hosting?

Try DreamHost!

Use the promo code 456BEREASTREET3 to save USD 20 when you sign up!

Latest articles

Validation statistics from Nikita the Spider Comments off
An analysis of the sites crawled by the bulk validation tool Nikita the Spider during March 2008.
Authentic Jobs API and Affiliates program Comments off
The Authentic Jobs job listing service now has a public API and an affiliate program.
What does Acid3 mean to you and me? Comments off
Opera and Apple have announced that their web browsers pass the Acid3 Browser Test, but how will that help web designers and developers?
Designing Web Navigation (Book review) Comments off
Learn the fundamentals of navigation design and design better navigation systems for large and small sites as well as for web based applications.
DOMAssistant bundle for TextMate Comments off
To save keystrokes and speed up development I have created a DOMAssistant bundle for TextMate.
First impressions of Internet Explorer 8 Beta 1 Comments off
My impressions after trying out Internet Explorer 8 Beta 1 for a couple of days.

More articles

Favourites, here and elsewhere

Affiliation

  • NetRelations
  • Kaffesnobben
  • Dagens recept
  • 9rules network member

Support this site

Show your support by buying a book or two from SitePoint or getting me something from my Amazon Wish List.