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

RE: New WD

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 12:20:16 -0500 (EST)
To: Charles Oppermann <chuckop@microsoft.com>
cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9903081216510.8715-100000@tux.w3.org>
It is correct that changing the document by adding or removing something
may change the priorities of various parts of the solution. However it
seems to me important that we give an approximate statement of priority in
working drafts. Thus for each working draft there is an indication of
what priority a given checkpoint has within the framework outlined by that
working draft. My experience is that in fact the changes in priorities
required by the introduction of new material are fairly small.

This is certainly open to discussion by the members of the group.

Charles McCathieNevile

On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Charles Oppermann wrote:

  How can items be prioritized when all the problems/solutions aren't known?
  It causes re-discussion of priorities every time something new comes in.
  
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
  Sent: Friday, March 05, 1999 10:57 AM
  To: dd@w3.org
  Cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
  Subject: Re: New WD
  
  
  We gave Priority X to everything which we thought had not had some
  dicussion of priority. All priorities are still (like everything else)
  open for negotiation - see the status section of the document.
  
  I disagree with putting the focus on one or other aspect of accessibility.
  Although I feel that in teh big world it is more important that all tools
  produce accessible ooutput than that all tools are accessible, a decision
  like that is beyond the scope of the group, whose charter is to provide
  guidelines on how authoring tools can be accessible in both areas.
  
  My suggestion with the deifinition of checkpoints would be to remove the
  parnethese altogether, or to change the wording in parenthese from (and
  the content it produces) to (including the content it produces)
  
  Charles
  
  On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, Daniel Dardailler wrote:
  
    
    I thought we decided to remove all priorities (e.g. replaced them with
    X) until we work out new definitions for priority and until we apply
    these definitions to all checkpoints.
    
    Also, in the current definition of checkpoint/priority I would want to 
    see the emphasis put on the 'Ensure that content produced by the tool
    is accessible" part, not the "Accessible environment" part.
    
    For instance:
      A checkpoint answers the question "What must/should/may I do to make
      an authoring tool (and the content it produces) accessible?" 
    should be
      A checkpoint answers the question "What must/should/may I do to make
      an authoring tool produce accessible content (or be accessible to
      all authors)?" 
    
    
    Or for the [Priority 1] definition, instead of:
    
      This checkpoint must be implemented by authoring tools, otherwise one
      or more groups of users with disabilities will find it impossible to
      access some function of the tool, or some content produced by
      it. Satisfying this checkpoint is a basic requirement for some
      individuals to be able to use the authoring tool or its output.
    I'd use
      This checkpoint must be implemented by authoring tools, otherwise one
      or more groups of users with disabilities will find it impossible to
      access some content produced by it (or some function of the
      tool). Satisfying this checkpoint is a basic requirement for some
      individuals to be able to use the output of the authoring tool (or
      the tool itself)
    
    
  
  --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
  

--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 Monday, 8 March 1999 12:20:20 GMT

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