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

Re: Action Item: 3.3 Proposal (Writing Style)

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 16:23:00 -0800
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010312161729.05b06bb0@mail.gorge.net>
To: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>, Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 06:22 PM 3/12/01 -0500, Anne Pemberton wrote:
>The guidelines need to address this problem, even if it isn't the easiet 
>one to tackle.

I also think this is an important issue.

Having said that I also believe that a formal "checkpoint" is not how we 
should address this problem. I have come to believe that checkpoints should 
be checkable, though perhaps not entirely automatically, but at least 
sensibly. While I may agree that illustrations being called for will lead 
to something useful/checkable/effective I am no longer persuaded that 
anything in the checkpoint department concerning clear/simple will serve 
much purpose.

It is of course mandatory to "address this problem" and our only 
disagreement is where/how to do so. I suggest as many of us as feel able to 
do so, write some language to deal with this and suggest where it might 
best be used. I think the very idea of a checkpoint is undermined by this 
particular very important thing being where it is.

--
Love.
                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Monday, 12 March 2001 19:23:38 GMT

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