- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:12:41 -0800
- 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 W3C. 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 me. --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com> Technical Developer Liaison Customer Management/Edapta Reef North America Tel +1 949-567-7006 ________________________________________ ACCESSIBILITY IS DYNAMIC. TAKE CONTROL. ________________________________________ http://www.reef.com
Received on Friday, 16 February 2001 11:36:05 UTC