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

Re: new draft of technology-specific checkpoints

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 15:04:04 +1100 (EST)
To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10102081451270.10818-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
This is an excellent start. Suggestions:

1. Merge XHTML into the HTML requirement list (only treat it separately
where issues of modularization are relevant).

2. Checkpoint 1.1 does not, in my opinion, apply to CSS. To what extent
should CSS be treated separately from HTML/XML?

3. We should think of a better term than "technology-specific checkpoint",
not only is this a cumbersome term but it invites confusion with the
checkpoints in the guidelines. I would propose instead to call them
"techniques", defined as follows:

A technique is a concise statement of an implementation strategy which
satisfies one or more checkpoints. Often, techniques are specific to a
given web-related technology.

In the actual document, techniques would be sharply distinguished from the
following:

a. Code examples.

b. Discussion.

The existing structure of the Techniques document would be
maintained--that is, there would continue to exist a set of core
techniques, together with technology-specific techniques for (X)HTML, CSS,
SVG, SMIL, client-side programming (i.e. scripts), etc.
Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2001 23:04:11 GMT

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