W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-eo-site@w3.org > July 2005

[Fwd: Re: Request for Review of WAI Site Redesign Prototype]

From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 08:40:55 +0100
Message-ID: <42C79687.80802@w3.org>
To: wstf <public-wai-eo-site@w3.org>


Please see the following e-mail, forwarded with Jason's permission.

~ Shawn

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Request for Review of WAI Site Redesign Prototype
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 10:54:59 +1000
From: 'Jason White' <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
References: <42C6E00D.4070804@w3.org>

Hello Shawn,

Thank you for your inquiry. The redesigned site is well organized, 
written in valid XHTML as one would expect, and, to me at least, highly 
accessible. I normally don't use those "skip to content" links as I can 
easily move rapidly through the page to reach the main body of the text, 
but with your redesigned site those "skip" links are actually useful as 
there is so much navigational structure at the start of each document. I 
also appreciate your decision to divide the navigational material into 
separate lists, which are clearly worded and well structured.

The link from the home page to WAI/IG#current which is supposed to offer 
a list of working drafts and other documents, is broken - error 404. 
Also, the references to the WCAG working drafts should be updated to the 
30 June 2005 versions. The link to presentations by the W3C team returns 
a 403 ("forbidden") error. In general, checking the whole redesigned 
site for broken links and outdated content would be essential before 
replacing the existing site.

The documents introducing guidelines and other areas of WAI work are 
clear and well written, so far as a quick perusal reveals.

With best regards,

Received on Sunday, 3 July 2005 06:41:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:56:55 UTC