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

5/21 draft

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:17:07 -0700
Message-ID: <374ABEF3.B56767E7@gorge.net>
To: au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
2.2.2 If checkpoint grammars are to be paralleled this should start with
an active verb rather than a noun.

I wonder if for the checkpoints that are "priority-dependent" it is not
a priority 1 that they ensure "conformance at the appropriate level"
rather than having separate guidelines for each priority?

We are down to eight guidelines!!  They are tersely but clearly stated.
This is a VGT (very good thing).  Of the 43 checkpoints, many are
redundant because of the decision to have separate checkpoints for the
"priority-dependent" ones, so our count there is also reasonable.

When the original WCAG warranted Kynn's "aiee, it's huge" thread starter
we had reason to fear an off-putting of our audience and when we started
with AU guidelines we feared the developers would be prone to object to
all the imperatives presented - now we say "hey, there's only 8!"  

I think we must examine all these in regard to their specificity
relating to "save as" type functions - the very ones that potentially
cause the most problems.  If someone makes a tool with proper alerts,
etc. for the top-of-the-line html editor it would seem that they would
have in-house a library that could be incorporated into word processors
and other software that poses a threat to Web accessibility.  I hope the
managers of Office Suites will reconsider their reluctance to furnish
accessibility inclusions when they make publishing to the Web "too easy"
in terms of eroding access.
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 1999 11:16:31 UTC

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