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

Re: goals

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 11:17:04 -0400 (EDT)
To: Bruce Roberts/CAM/Lotus <Bruce_Roberts/CAM/Lotus@lotus.com>
cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9906161116300.17203-100000@tux.w3.org>
I'm happy if we do that.

Charles

On Wed, 16 Jun 1999, Bruce Roberts/CAM/Lotus wrote:

  
  I'd like to keep alive the idea of making the second goal less commanding
  in its intent.  This is related to the discussion I began on the list:
  
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/1999AprJun/0304.html
  
  At this point I'd like to put up Charles's wording for goal 2:
  
  "The authoring tool creates accessible content"
  
  -- Bruce
  
  
  
  
  Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>@w3.org on 06/15/99 11:55:20 PM
  
  Sent by:  w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org
  
  
  To:   William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
  cc:   au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
  
  Subject:  Re: goals
  
  
  I think we should have the link text which explains that the priorities are
  defined in terms of their importance to meeting those goals, just to make
  the
  thing a bit more readiable. The rest of it i think we can live without.
  
  Charles McCN
  
  On Tue, 15 Jun 1999, William Loughborough wrote:
  
    1.3 Checkpoint priorities
    [Editors' note: These definitions are to be further refined]
              There are three goals:
                    The authoring tool is accessible
                    Authors will create accessible content
                    The tool will encourage creation of accessible content
              [Priority 1]
                    Essential to meeting those goals
              [Priority 2]
                    Important to meeting those goals
              [Priority 3]
                    Beneficial to meeting those goals
  
    I don't think these *GOALS* need any "further refinement" or laborious
    definition.  It is often claimed that we never "define" accessible but
    since it is an operational thing, a "proper" definition might emerge in
    the mind of a thoughtful guideline reader without some tortuous
    explanation.  Accessible means almost all authors can use the tool and
    almost all surfers can glean info from the output of the authoring tool.
    It doesn't mean the output will be useful to people who cannot read or
    understand the "content" but it does mean Helen Keller could probably
    find a recipe for chocolate chip cookies and possibly even put up a page
    attempting to explain what "water" meant to her.
    --
    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
  
  
  
  

--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, 16 June 1999 11:17:42 UTC

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