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

RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0

From: Charles F. Munat <chas@munat.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 12:17:11 -0700
To: "WAI Guidelines WG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <LHEGJAOEDCOFFBGFAPKBKEFHCJAA.chas@munat.com>
Kynn:
> That's how you do -this- experiment, Chas.  If you're doing an experiment,
> of course.  Number crunching isn't experimental and you are barking up
> the wrong tree (and COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY MISUNDERSTANDING SCIENCE!!!
> oops sorry I got in Chas mode) if you are looking for data analysis to
> include hypotheses.

I see that using all caps to make things stand out was a bad idea. (So much
for the null hypothesis.)

>
> This "experiment" isn't valuable as an experiment -- because it's not
> one!  It's just the starting point, to stimulate discussion.  It's what
> needs to be documented FIRST, before you can go ahead and do real
> science.

My point exactly. Your "experiment" wasn't one. But it will be perceived as
one because it implies certain conclusions. And some people -- especially
those with an axe to grind -- will rush to those conclusions. If there is
any value to this checkpoint count it is as a generator of hypotheses that
can be tested under controlled conditions. Put simply, I think that we could
have achieved the same positive result without all the potential negative
results. And I think it was a bad idea to post your results to the IG list
rather than the GL list. It is much more likely to be cross-posted and
misinterpreted there than here.

Chas. Munat
Received on Saturday, 25 August 2001 15:14:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:12 GMT