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

Re: Techniques

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 11:11:24 -0500
Message-ID: <36BF0CAC.14E40B49@w3.org>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
CC: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> 
> I have been thinking that the sample implementation section belongs in a
> Techniques document. Irene Vatton suggested that we should spread it
> through the current document as examples.
> 
> It seems to me that the sample implementations as a single group is a
> useful thing to have as a whole, as well as individual examples
> illustrating each of the guidelines, which is how techniques documents
> work in the other two WAI guidelines.
> 
> I would like the Techniques document to use a numbering system which
> matched the Guidelines, since it can create confusion to work with
> two different numbering systems.

What do you mean by two numbering systems?

The PAGL and UAGL have different tables of contents in
the two documents. One reason for this is to give users two
views of the information (e.g. for the UAGL: a "user" view,
namely, user needs, and a "developer" view, namely interfaces
the developer should be aware of). Two tables of contents
means that section 4 in one document will be talking about
something else than section 4 in the other. This was a conscious
decision.

It was also a conscious decision to define (and number)
the checkpoints in the guidelines document and use 
the same numbers to refer to them in the techniques document. 
I can see this causing some confusion, but the checkpoints
are not redefined in the techniques document, only 
referenced.

Please accept this as background information for this
dicussion,

 - Ian
  
-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) 
Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 
http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Received on Monday, 8 February 1999 11:11:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 September 2008 15:52:54 GMT