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

RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious.

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:57:18 -0500
To: "'WAI Guidelines WG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005001c12980$06eafa20$066fa8c0@750>
How's this for confusing
We can't even talk about CharlesM or CM since we now have two of each.
Using CamelCase I guess we could use CM and CMCN.

Anyhow -- Question to CMunat

Were you suggesting breaking the guidelines into 3 documents? Or just
regrouping along different titles?


-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Professor - Human Factors
Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis.
Director - Trace R & D Center
Gv@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <http://trace.wisc.edu/>
FAX 608/262-8848 
For a list of our listserves send “lists” to listproc@trace.wisc.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Charles McCathieNevile
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 8:06 AM
To: Charles F. Munat
Cc: WAI Guidelines WG
Subject: RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this.
I'm serious.

For all that I am not in favour of using the results of this to produce
documents, I think this is a very important step to approaching what we
trying to do. I agree that the difference between comprehension and
independence" is a major source of friction within the group, but I
think the
answer to that is that we try to listen a bit more carefully to each
and reduce the friction that goes with working on different things at
same time.



On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Charles F. Munat wrote:

  I suggest reviewing all checkpoints, splitting some into more detailed
  checkpoints, and reorganizing them into three groups. I think that we
  find homes for the technology checkpoints.

  As for leaving access and comprehension together, those are the two
areas I
  am MOST interested in seeing separated, because I think that this
  intersection is the source of almost all the friction and controversy
  this group. Also, I'd like to see a lot more focus on comprehension.
And I
  have some questions, such as, How do we measure success?

  I would at least like to take a stab at it. Is anyone else willing to
  come up with a quick rearrangement of the checkpoints to see what
  like this might look like? If it just doesn't work, well, thems the
  But I'd really like to give it a try just to see...

Received on Monday, 20 August 2001 10:05:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:59:20 UTC