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

Re: Call for review of WCAG 2.0 draft

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:12:41 -0800
Message-Id: <>
To: love26@gorge.net (William Loughborough), Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 06:25 PM 2/15/2001, William Loughborough wrote:
>The nature of WCAG is that it is written for people who design the tools, 
>not *just* use them. The latter shouldn't even know that the engine has 
>connecting rods, pistons, and a crankshaft - the former must have access 
>to the particulars of designing those elements.

I don't want to start another long argument with my friend William,
but I would like to say that I disagree with this approach because
I feel that it is deliberately ignoring what we know about how WCAG
is used and by whom, and I feel that it presupposes the existence
of certain types of "interpretative documents" which, to the best
of my knowledge, either don't exist or aren't acknowledged by the

Of course, if you want to know more about my opinion than the 6
lines above, you're free to skim the archives. :)  That's all from


Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Customer Management/Edapta
Reef North America
Tel +1 949-567-7006
Received on Friday, 16 February 2001 11:36:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC