Yehuda, I have raised the issue[1][2] you outline with Ian Jacobs, the W3C Process working group and others at W3C, It's my particular concern and thesis that authors and end-users, including those requiring alternative affordance are not well represented on W3C working groups. Why is there no W3C UA Games technology or WG? regards Jonathan Chetwynd Honte.eu Jonathan Chetwynd j.chetwynd@btinternet.com http://www.openicon.org/ +44 (0) 20 7978 1764 [1] On 24 Sep 2009, at 20:00, Yehuda Katz wrote: > I'll think about it. I was mostly hoping to start a discussion about > alternatives. I think the bottom line here is that while the spec is > well-optimized for implementors, it is not very well optimized for > consumers. I suppose it would be possible to say that this stuff is > *only* for implementors. I'd prefer if it were also readable for > those trying to use the specification. > > -- Yehuda > [2] There are for instance a very large number of published comments raising similar concerns, regarding the technical language of WCAG2 - WAI, W3C.
Received on Sunday, 27 September 2009 09:09:56 UTC