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

Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 17:27:00 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

         Guideline 1 uses the term "equivalent" .... changing it to 
"parallels" in Guideline 3 would be confusing. But in the discussion, if 
parallels helps comprehension, use it ....


At 12:02 PM 7/30/01 -0400, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
>At 5:13 PM -0400 2001/7/29, Anne Pemberton wrote:
>>         I'd suggest that text which is content is the text that needs 
>> equivalents. Text that is a link already has an equivalent at the end of 
>> the click ... text that is in a database or table may or may not need an 
>> equivalent, depending on whether it's content, or just an index ..... 
>> Text is a glossary, dictionary, or encyclopedia should have at least one 
>> equivalent ...
>Maybe we don't want to say "equivalent", maybe we want to say "parallels"?
>Does that semantic quibble help turn the issue around for anyone?
>Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
>Technical Developer Liaison
>Reef North America
>Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network
>Tel +1 949-567-7006

Anne Pemberton

Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 17:57:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:11 GMT