- From: jonathan chetwynd <jonathan@signbrowser.free-online.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 10:19:14 +0100
- To: "Sylvie Duchateau" <sduchate@hall.snv.jussieu.fr>, <danield@w3.org>, <ij@w3.org>, <charles@w3.org>, <max@w3.org>, <JHOWELL@rnib.org.uk>, <cpl@starlingweb.com>, <hbingham@acm.org>, <hbj@visinfo.dk>, <unagi69@concentric.net>, <Rafael.Romero@uv.es>, <nir@nirdagan.com>, <karl.hebenstreit@gsa.gov>, "Judy Brewer" <jbrewer@w3.org>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
I am not fully aware of this development. I do ot accept that reviewing be in private, if possible. Reviewers are aware that their comments are public, and unless their reply address is W3.org it is recognised that their comments are not official. I certainly circulate materials to peers for comments before replying, and this could be compromised. LD, SN, cognitive impairment, call it what you will, is a complex problem and if someone can take the time to review their needs and also attempt to relate that to the qualities of a site, it needs all the publicity it can get. It is certainly strange to expect that a 'black box' is going to generate useful information, currently reviewing is about as useful a task as could be done. Reviewers could of course and do contact each other offline. I am awaiting a list of sites deemed to be accessible to cog dis clients. If they are suitable, these clients will give criticisms that will be posted. Jonathan Chetwynd jay@peepo.com Search the www with pictures at www.peepo.com It appears to be a great idea, lets get it going and please keep it public. Send us your links We value your comments
Received on Friday, 15 October 1999 05:29:49 UTC