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

Re: my action item

From: Andi Snow-Weaver <andisnow@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 12:37:46 -0500
Message-ID: <39D381EA.F59E4577@us.ibm.com>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>

CORRECTION: the URL for the IBM Accessibility Guidelines is
http://www.ibm.com/able/guidelines.htm.

Andi

>
>
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <39D37317.47483831@us.ibm.com>
> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:34:32 -0500
> From: Andi Snow-Weaver <andisnow@us.ibm.com>
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: Re: my action item
>
> >
>
> Lisa,
>
> I find the table somewhat unwieldy with only three technologies. It will only
> get worse as we add more columns. If I am working in HTML and CSS, I am only
> interested in those two columns. But because the checkpoint column and the
> XML/XSL columns take up half the width of the window, I am forced to read
> screens and screens of narrow columns of information. Cognitively, it is hard
> for me to keep focused with this presentation.
>
> In the IBM Accessibility Guidelines (http://www.ibm.com/able/guidelines.html),
> we have only the checkpoints in a table. Each checkpoint has a link to a page
> with the techniques for that checkpoint. In IBM, we have found that the best
> approach is to have a separate checklist for each technology. For example, we
> could have added techniques for developing accessible Lotus Notes applications
> to the software checklist. But, when someone is creating a form in Lotus Notes,
> they just want to know what they have to do to make that form accessible. They
> don't really care about the original principle from which the techniques were
> derived. So rather than make them wade through checkpoints that don't apply and
> techniques for a technology they are not currently using, we chose to develop
> separate checklists for Lotus Notes developers.
>
> Andi
>
> >   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > From: "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>
> > To: "WAI \(E-mail\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> > Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:12:07 +0200
> > Message-ID: <000a01c02925$4ec47300$5fa1003e@ndcil.com>
> > Subject: my action item
> >
> > I put up  a draft of the table format up at
> > http://special-needs.org/tablecheckp1.html It is a draft, just to see if we
> > think techniques are clearer in a table format.
> > Before anyone gets upset, I have not even tried edit (typos? me?) ....This
> > is just to see if we like the general format.
> > I have only done the first three checkpoints.
> >
> > Things to note:
> > The first checkpoint has (I think) the most techniques, so it makes it the
> > hardest to present in this form.
> > I left out examples, The table was just getting too big. We could link them
> > in, or just add them (as with the original techniques document).
> >
> > I do not know if this type of presentation is an improvement -
> > Your comments......
> > L
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    * Previous message: Wendy A Chisholm: "Beyond the page - applications"
>    * In reply to: Lisa Seeman: "my action item"
>    * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>    * Other mail archives: [this mailing list] [other W3C mailing lists]
>    * Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Received on Thursday, 28 September 2000 13:40:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:06 GMT