W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2000

Further acknowledgments in relation to draft of guidelines

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:55:43 +1100 (EST)
To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10009131138220.23950-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
In the draft which was circulated under my name over the weekend, I tried
to take into account contributions by a variety of working group
participants. These include:

1. Kynn's concerns as to the presence of vague, imprecise or unqualified
statements in the exposition of general guidelines.

2. Cynthia's concern that guidelines should be as precise as possible in
specifying requirements, and that they be applicable to future as well as
current technologies, including, in particular, server-side solutions.
Also, the distinction between "web content" and "applications" is partly
addressed, for example in the note accompanying Principle 4.

3. Dick's reminder that structured data bases and metadata do not carry
their own (author-supplied) presentations has been taken into account
(note accompanying guideline 3).

4. The issue, raised by Loretta, of character encodings and the role of
standard character sets as a requirement for accessibility, influenced the
reformulation of guideline 1.1.

5. William's desire for clear and general principles as the basis of the
more concrete guidelines, has influenced the reformulation of principles 1
and 5.

6. Andi's discussion of the circumstances in which synchronized text
equivalents and auditory descriptions are required (see her reformulation
of the guidelines under Principle 1) led to the discussion attachedto
guideline 1.2.

7. The discussion surrounding the meaning of "graceful transformation" led
to its removal from the document in this draft.

8. The desire for greater clarity and simplicity led to the removal of
unnecessary terminology (such as "default presentations", "author-supplied
presentations" etc.).

Please review the draft to determine whether, and if so how well, your
concerns have been met, what further changes could be made, etc.
Received on Tuesday, 12 September 2000 20:57:54 UTC

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