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

Re: Proposal for Guideline 2 as well as a proposal to trim WCAG 2.0 to 3 guidelines (won't william be glad?)

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 00:38:12 -0500 (EST)
To: Robert Neff <robneff@home.com>
cc: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0101080034430.8192-100000@tux.w3.org>
Rob, I agree that we need techniques. I think the simplest one is to provide
a means for creating a static link to the latest version of updating
information. For an example, use Lynx to look at a live cricket score from
www.cricinfo.net - there is a link to the latest information available, and
the default version of the site automatically updates every so offten (which
I always forget, and wish i could turn off more easily).

This works for real-time feeds as well as for stuff that  is just moving
along a timeline (SMIL 2.0 describes how to solve the latter problem in
detail).

Cheers

Charles McCN

On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Robert Neff wrote:

  comment on '2.3 Provide user control over time-based events or content that
  introduces unexpected changes in context'

  in my mind i need some clarification that this permits alternatives methods
  to be read.  for example, if this is a applet or a javascript ticker, then
  is an an alternative link acceptable.  a curious cicumstance would be if the
  feed was real time.  could the author have the ability or knowledge to
  automatically update a separate file every ten minutes?  this may be more of
  a technique issue where an example may be needed, but would like to raise
  the question.
Received on Monday, 8 January 2001 00:38:58 GMT

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