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

Re: new draft published - please review

From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 15:19:32 -0500
Message-ID: <010f01bf8acd$f32f5f00$b040968e@ic.utoronto.ca>
To: "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>
Cc: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Yet another new draft of the ERT:

I've made quite a few changes including:
- messages are now called 'Suggested messages'
- repairs (additional actions) are now called 'Suggested repairs'
- definitions of valid attributes are called 'Valid X attribute'
- requirements now describe what is required in the document
- added several comments with @@CR
- added "note: 'd-link' now deprecated"
- 1.1.11 <NOSCRIPT> must occur after the <SCRIPT></SCRIPT> not between.
<NOSCRIPT> section can contain valid HTML but not another <SCRIPT></SCRIPT>.
- 1.1.13 described algorithm for finding ASCII art
- 4.2.1 modified algorithm for acronym/abbreviation detection
- 5.5.2 Table Captions - removed (not required by WCAG)
- 9.4.1 We now require that objects must have TABINDEX attribute

Should we remove the 'discussion status' sections? Every guideline is now
under discussion.

I question whether we should check other linked documents as Len suggests
(technique 1.1.9). For example, if an image has a LONGDESC link then we have
to assume that the LONGDESC file is OK. The LONGDESC file may not be created
yet. After all, the user is checking this file, not yet the other files.

If we see that there is a linked file then we can ask if the user want's
that one checked too. Make sense?

I've made changes down to "@@CR - got to here"


----- Original Message -----
From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
To: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 8:02 PM
Subject: new draft published - please review

> hello,
> new draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/ert-20000307.html
> as always, the latest is available from http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/
> There are lots of @@'s since Len noted some changes he made.  There were
> also several open issues from before.  Please focus on commenting on those
> items.
> Also note that I added two levels of table of contents.  I have not yet
> added the "next section" and "previous section" buttons.  the to do list
> has all of the to do's but this one.
> I think we ought to give this a very thorough read to make sure that
> nothing has been broken by our edits.
> Please keep in mind as you are reviewing the document with the goal of
> sending it to AU, WCAG, and IG next week.
> Thanks.
> I look forward to your comments,
> --wendy
> --
> wendy a chisholm
> world wide web consortium
> web accessibility initiative
> madison, wi usa
> tel: +1 608 663 6346
> /--
Received on Friday, 10 March 2000 15:19:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:30 UTC