W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > January 2000


From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 17:28:04 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
Technique 1.1.K is priority 3.  However, it is a technique of a Priority 1 

If the priority of the WCAG checkpoint is not inherited, then how do we 
define priorities for this document? I do not believe we can inherit the 
priority definitions from WCAG.  The priority definitions would probably be 
similar to ATAG [1] yet have to be stated in the context of this document.

If we define priorities for this document, are we expecting people to 
conform to it?

If we are expecting people to conform to it, then I think that implies we 
want to take this to Recommendation status.  Do we want to take it to 
Recommendation or release it as a Note?


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-WAI-AUTOOLS-19991026/#priorities
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
madison, wi usa
tel: +1 608 663 6346
Received on Sunday, 23 January 2000 17:26:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:29 UTC