W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: what type of document do we want?

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 18:09:24 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: love26@gorge.net (William Loughborough), Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>, Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>
Cc: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

	Yes, indeed! I remember some of the tales I heard about the laws for
handicapped housing, which resulted in a whole buiding in NYC built with
"accessible bathrooms" that had doorways too small to let the wheel chair
into the accessible fixtures ... or the curb cuts built at the school I
used to work for, one of which smashed the user into a structural pole at
the top! Subjective evaluation cannot soon be replaced completely by
all-machine examinations .... 

	Just like the points raised by Bruce this morning ... suggesting that the
guidelines will have to dictate some "reading level" in order to enforce
"clear and simple language".... I hesitate to dictate a somewhat arbitrary
"number", but he's suggesting it's necessary in order to bring such users
to the table... Likewise with illustrations ... I wouldn't want to say how
many graphics per page indicate it's properly "illustrated", but will we
have to? 

At 06:10 AM 4/2/01 -0700, William Loughborough wrote:
>At 02:58 AM 4/2/01 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>most of the things that are critical for accessibility cannot be done 
>>without some subjective judgement. It is next to useless to know simply 
>>that there is some alternative equivalent without knowing that it actually 
>>provides something equivalent.
>Case closed!
Anne Pemberton

Received on Monday, 2 April 2001 18:04:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC