- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:57:17 -0600
- To: "'Andi Snow-Weaver'" <andisnow@us.ibm.com>, <public-wcag-teamc@w3.org>
I think that the new wording would address the command. True, someone could mis-read it but I would add a failure to 1.1.1 to address Al's comment. The CAPTCHA has information. The input box takes input. The CAPTCHA image itself does not take input. So it would need to be have text alternative - unless you wanted to take the turing exception. So - I don't see a problem with our current (NEW) wording for Al's comment. Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. > -----Original Message----- > From: public-wcag-teamc-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-wcag-teamc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Andi > Snow-Weaver > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 1:47 PM > To: public-wcag-teamc@w3.org > Subject: LC-958 > > > > Still struggling with 1.1.1. > > Please see LC-958 [1] and let's discuss where to go with it. > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/issue-tracking/viewdata_indivi > dual.php?id=958 > > Andi > > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 November 2006 03:58:30 UTC