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

Re: Checkpoints and Techniques

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:16:31 -0500 (EST)
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
cc: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9902271514490.21555-100000@tux.w3.org>
I agree that we should be separating the documents, but I think we want to
have fairly stropng cross-linking between a given checkpouint and
techniques to satisfy it.

Charles

On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Ian Jacobs wrote:

  Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
  > 
  > I think we need to think about whether Techniques are applied to
  > checkpoints, guidelines, or both. My proposal is that we categorise
  > techniques by checkpoint normally, although I don't think we should
  > preclude the possibility that there are techniques which apply to a whole
  > guideline.
  
  I think the techniques should be separated from the checkpoints
  and guidelines, preferably in another document, but at least
  after the checkpoints and guidelines. Too much detail inline
  will distract readers from the flow of more abstract discussions.
  
  One reasons to create a second document is to save download
  and printing times. The Web Content Guidelines alone
  are about 20 pages. The Techniques document is almost 50. 
  If you want a reader to digest the ideas, the Guidelines
  document should be kept as short as possible.
  
   - Ian
  
  -- 
  Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) 
  Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 
  http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
  

--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 Saturday, 27 February 1999 15:16:38 GMT

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