- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 11:21:31 -0700
- To: "webmaster@dors.sailorsite.net" <webmaster@dors.sailorsite.net>
- Cc: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>, Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 07:09 AM 7/22/1999 , Bruce Bailey wrote: >Allow me to quote from an email sent by contractor defending his work after >I critiqued his horribly inaccessible site. Mind you, this vendor >understands that accessibility is an issue. My main point in posting this >here is to provide hearsay evidence that vendors will try and use WCAG as a >"Chinese menu" -- picking and choosing among what they want. And this is >with the current WCAG. Charles' observations are quite on the mark. We >don't dare weaken the A/AA/AAA levels! I disagree entirely; I think we need to be more concerned with the checkpoint priorities and remember they are based on "must", "should" and "may", and not focus so highly on single-A/double-AA/triple-AAA! I think WCAG _should_ be a Chinese menu (anyone need that idiom explained?) because that's how it's written and that's apparently the intent of the document! To use it otherwise -- to decree that the priority levels constitute a sensible implementation plan -- is ridiculous! -- Kynn Bartlett mailto:kynn@hwg.org President, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org/ AWARE Center Director http://aware.hwg.org/
Received on Sunday, 25 July 1999 14:22:27 UTC