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

Re: Breaking the Techniques "Writer's Block"

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 12:20:19 -0500 (EST)
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0101021217530.27842-100000@tux.w3.org>
Hmm. ATAG more or less encompasses all of WCAG in about 3 different places
(techniques included, for the techniques document).

But more to the point, I agree that it is important to have named people
working on things. The approach we are using at the moment in ATAG is to do
this, but the named people are responsible for the content that comes from a
particular generated view of the content, and they are collectively working
on teh same source document. (This makes it a big document, but also means
that people have what the other techniques documents contain in front of them
when they are working on it. I found that very vlauable when editing ATAG



On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Kynn Bartlett wrote:

  At 08:06 AM 1/2/2001 , Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
  >Techniques are marked according to the things for which they are relevant.
  >(At the moment this is done using classes inside an HTML source, but if it
  >gets too big I will use external RDF).
  >Then the various documents are generated by splitting out a relevant

  Charles, that is not a bad idea, but one of my chief concerns here
  is tracking and accountability.  I feel that things work better if
  they are put in the hands of responsible people -- the more the
  better -- who take "stewardship" of a given set of information and
  who work to ensure that the information is complete and accurate.

  I think that right now we are somewhat "stalled" (despite making a
  great deal of philosophical progress) in terms of creating
  documents, which is our primary goal here.  I think that by all
  (or most) of us getting involved and rolling up our sleeves and
  working on -specific- tasks, we can get the fires stoked up and
  get back on track.

  I also think that the size of information for WCAG 2.0 is larger
  than that necessary for ATAG -- because we are planning to deal
  with a number of different technologies (XHTML, SVG, SMIL, HTML,
  CSS, etc) in parallel.  Separating out those parallel streams
  into separate tracks just makes the most sense to me.


Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
until 6 January 2001 at:
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Tuesday, 2 January 2001 12:20:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:35 UTC