W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 1998


From: Jerry A. Silva <jassilva@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 23:20:44 -0800
Message-ID: <36760DCC.11C5477C@ix.netcom.com>
To: Jason White <jason@pc128-linux1.lib.unimelb.edu.au>
CC: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Jason White wrote:

> In making determinations of relative priority, this working group has
> already been taking into account considerations, albeit in an informal
> manner, of the impact of various design techniques on the usability of
> an electronic document for a range of identifiable groups. This is
> clearest in the distinction between the first two priority levels
> defined in the guidelines: if, for any recognizable class of users, it
> is evident that failure to implement the suggested technique would
> make the informational content completely inaccessible, in the sense
> of being unavailable to sense perception, then it is accorded a first
> level of priority. Discrimination between levels 2 and 3 is also
> founded on likely impact, together with other considerations, such as
> the extent to which the problem can be better addressed by other
> solutions, such as improvements in user agent software.
> The broad expertise of the group, and the external review to which the
> guidelines have been and are currently being subjected, are intended
> to ensure that assessments of impact are far from arbitrary.
> I am unsure whether any kind of impact quanitifcation would yield more
> reliable results than the processes already described. The
> distinctions between priority 1 and 2 techniques seem clear and
> largely, if not entirely, beyond dispute. As mentioned, a range of
> considerations, not just likely effect on particular groups of users,
> has been taken into account when differentiating priorities 2 and 3.
Received on Tuesday, 15 December 1998 02:24:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:28 UTC