W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: useful contribution?

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:50:24 -0500
Message-ID: <4188F030.3050601@utoronto.ca>
To: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
CC: charles@sidar.org, "List (WAI-AUWG)" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>

Hi William,

Actually, I think what you have done is quite helpful - so I have sent 
it to the AU list.

Thanks,
Jan

William Loughborough wrote:

> As I wrestled during the F2F with the rationales' content I longed for a 
> means of extracting all the rationales (which I've called the "ATAG 
> whys") so that they could be made more "of-the-same-cloth" looking. The 
> availability of an "element- retrieval/listing" similar to the familiar 
> TOC generator would be a handy inclusion in ATAG?
> 
> In the end I just cut/pasted all the rationales into one place 
> http://uwimp.com/atagwhys.htm  where the evidence of their (probably 
> uncalled for?) diversity in length/tone/voice was clearly demonstrated. 
> A process similar to what I've shown might serve us (I'm still a member 
> in spirit even though I'm neither in good standing nor even a subscriber 
> to the list) well as we polish this thing for last call.
> 
> Perhaps the proper wordsmithies can attack them for 
> clarity/tersity/usefulness.
> 
> ATAG has only cursory "when/who/where" functions (mostly boiler plate, I 
> reckon) and is thus mainly a "what/why/how" 
> (guidelines/checkpoints/criteria, rationales, techniques) document.
> 
> I still think of "authoring" as the centerpiece of WAI stuff since I'm 
> strongly of the opinion that browsing/authoring/indexing/annotating are 
> all parts of a whole that might best be thought of as authoring; the 
> other more passive functions fade because interactivity makes us all 
> contributors to the knowledge base instead of "mere" audience.
> 
> It might even be good to send such excerpted segments to different 
> groups for help; e.g., EO might attack the "why" and criteria language 
> and PF and WCAG could deal best with the guidelines/checkpoints. The 
> "how" part is yet to be done. I gather there will be separate techniques 
> document for the "how" of it all.
> 
> I'm not even sure why I'm butting in here, but thought it might be of 
> some interest to the group who so graciously welcomed my participation 
> in S.F.: it kept me awake/busy for a couple hours.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Love.
> 
> Everyone/everything/everywhere/always connected
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 10/29/2004

-- 
Jan Richards, M.Sc.
User Interface Design Specialist
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC), University of Toronto

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896
Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2004 14:50:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:51 UTC