If I could walk that WAI I wouldn't need the guidelines

[j4]

Since the Understanding document ['Understanding WCAG 2.0'] is more than double the size of what it purports to explain, this itself may indicate a problem with WCAG 2.

Is it just me, or is an exposition of something often longer than what it's explaining? Particularly (one might even argue necessarily) when you're translating from technical specifications into more generally-accessible language, i.e. from high to low information density?

Comments

[j4.livejournal.com]

Quite -- except that not only do they not realise the depth of the subject, they don't realise its breadth (i.e. that it encompasses a lot of other subjects) as well.

IMO the person with a narrow field of real expertise is worse than the person who doesn't know much about anything. The graphic designer with a fearsome paper portfolio (but who doesn't know anti-aliasing from his elbow) is harder to argue with than the enthusiast who just wants it to look shiny; the BOFH assumes that if it's got computers in it, he automatically knows better than the ponytailed NuMeeja 'professional', and so on through the list of tedious stereotypes.

Me, I know I'm only just beginning to learn just how much I don't know. But in the country of the blind, the one-eyed man will probably be asked to do all the web-browsing.