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

Re: Accessibility vs. consideration X: how to handle

From: Leonard R. Kasday <kasday@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 09:40:21 -0500
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010102093046.00ccb5e0@pop3.concentric.net>
To: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cc: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
I want to copy here on the GL list a point Nick Kew made on the ER list, in 
response to the earlier version of my "considerations X" email that I 
mistakenly posted on that list:

>* Choice - the author sees a good reason to use a construct that [the 
>guidelines warn]
>   against, and that if used well will not present a problem.

(actually his post referred to a different document (EARL)  the result of 
my posting to the wrong list).

I take Nick's point to be that someone may figure out a way to make 
something accessible even though they're violating a checkpoint.

This reminds me of a related point: that following a checkpoint may bring 
up some other accessibility problem.

Theoretically, we'll write the checkpoints so that neither of these will 
ever happen.  But you never know... these are points to keep in mind.

Len




--
Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple 
University
(215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday         mailto:kasday@acm.org

Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/

The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: 
http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/
Received on Tuesday, 2 January 2001 09:56:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:09 GMT