W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: "content" strikes again

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 13:56:21 -0400 (EDT)
To: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
cc: au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9905051355580.3421-100000@tux.w3.org>
I like the idea of using document where we mean the whole thing.

Charles

On Wed, 5 May 1999, William Loughborough wrote:

  On reading Jutta's proposed revision to Priority 1's definition I find:
  "authors will create web content using the tool that does not conform"
  and once again we are faced with the problem of the many faces of
  "content".  If we are tied to the definition of content in WCAG "he
  content of a document refers to what it says to the user through
  natural language, images, sounds, movies, animations, etc." we should
  often substitute "web documents" for "web content" in this case as well
  as many others.  We're getting there with "author" vs. "user" so we must
  get there with "document" vs. "content".
  -- 
  Love.
              ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
  http://dicomp.pair.com
  

--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA
Received on Wednesday, 5 May 1999 13:56:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:42 UTC