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

re: a possibly contentious suggestion

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:12:53 -0500 (EST)
To: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9902171312130.4690-100000@tux.w3.org>
  I think that the principles given are the complete set, although I have a
  nagging feeling I forgot one. So I am expecting at most one more similar
  I expect some participation from the audience - people who write
  applications are not fools, although by and large they have never run
  across accessibility (any more than the people we cite in the 'explain
  accessibility in help files' checkpoint). I think what we are striving for
  is a document which can be read and give somebody a terse but accurate
  explanation of what needs to be done. I think we should also outline some
  strategies which could be used, but I would prefer them to be in a
  separate techniques document.
  On Tue, 16 Feb 1999, William Loughborough wrote:
    CMcCN: " I feel that something along these lines justifies the volume it
    adds to the document."
    WL:: How many similar instances are proposed?  Enough to warrant yet
    another document?  Or perhaps a major expansion of the Introduction? 
    Need guidelines serve as be-all/end-all exemplars of completeness or can
    we assume some participation from the audience?  

--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://purl.oclc.org/net/charles
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA
Received on Wednesday, 17 February 1999 13:12:57 UTC

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