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

Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good?

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001 12:49:01 -0700
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010908124038.02464200@localhost>
To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU, Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 03:42 PM 9/8/01 -0400, Al Gilman wrote:
>Does this make any sense?

Eminent good sense.

The justifiable complaints about WCAG 1.0 were directed at *its* 
accessibility/usability and more of the same will suffer the same.

That (normative semi-regulatory-sounding) already got done and has led to a 
spate of referring-to-it laws/regulations/policies which, not that they are 
engraved in marble don't need a lot of chipping or even cleaning. *They* 
got the idea.

"Normative" is no longer in the hunt but "informative" is de rigeur - which 
is what CMcCN has been saying over on ATAG - "keep those techniques coming, 
folks".

As Trummy Young sang "'Tain't Whatcha Do, It's the Way Howja Do It - That's 
What Gets Results." If you would hear this use the "result-oriented" link at
http://uwimp.com/tetra.htm

--
Love.
EACH UN-INDEXED/ANNOTATED WEB POSTING WE MAKE IS TESTAMENT TO OUR HYPOCRISY
Received on Saturday, 8 September 2001 15:46:38 GMT

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