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

Re: (won't william be glad?)

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 13:24:07 -0800
Message-Id: <>
To: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 03:44 PM 1/3/01 -0500, Wendy A Chisholm wrote:
>Question 1: Does this proposal oversimplify the guidelines, creating 
>something that is too general to understand?
>yes __
>no __
>Question 2: should we proceed with a trimmed down structure similar to the 
>one proposed in this e-mail in the next draft?
>yes __
>no __

OK by me but I would defer to those who have to argue over it.

"too general to understand" might turn out to have better been asked as 
"too general to be of any use". I could understand what it says and still 
be unable to act on it due to lack of specificity, but at anything "above" 
the techniques level this is sort of a "so what?" issue.

In proposed Guideline 1 strike "visually, auditorally, or tactually,"

In proposed Guideline 2 strike "without a mouse, only with a keyboard, only 
through voice, without voice, or with or without other devices,"

The level of checkpoint language abstraction might be exemplified by "1.1 
Provide equivalents for all content" with the explanations such as "text 
for image", "illustration of text", "captions"... etc., etc., etc. That 
explanatory level would be one level above the "how to's" of the techniques 
portion. 1.2 - 1.4 are "flesh-outs" of 1.1 and 1.5 is probably just a 
restatement of the guideline?

The 2.x and 3.x (3.5 probably belongs as 1.x?) checkpoints will take a lot 
more worrying with but on the whole the same principle applies: find the 
level of abstraction at which they belong and ferret out anything that's 
too specific.

Summary: In a way "less is more", particularly at the guideline level. We 
will have to wrestle with checkpoints for a while yet. On the whole I like 
the transformation/independence/comprehension divisions at least as well as 
any other. It swings, one can dance to it and I give it three pats on the head.

Received on Wednesday, 3 January 2001 16:23:32 UTC

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