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 20:21:09 -0700
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010908195506.03e8d2f0@localhost>
To: jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU, Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Cc: Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 12:27 PM 9/9/01 +1000, Jason White wrote:
>bearing in mind the technology-specific layer

It's not exactly sky-pie but it's definitely still vapo(u)rtext.

I can't speak for Al but as an interested observer there is essentially not 
much beyond motherhood in the principles. The "but what do I do?" so 
vociferously raised by those to whom we assign the doing is still in some 
sense glossed over.

This is most strongly evidenced by those items with "the vagues", e.g. 
checkpoint 1.3 Use markup or a data model to provide the logical structure 
of content. Even (or perhaps particularly?) with the subsequent explanatory 
success criteria and "informative" definitions/benefits/examples there is a 
residual unease with just what one attempting to conform is supposed to do. 
I think this is underlined/emphasized by "The definition for data model is 
under discussion."

The model of the document as a sort of "constitution" or "legislative 
array" awaiting "case law" elucidations seems stale when so many 
participants could furnish *real* examples of "how-to" stuff. I think 
trying to divorce some hierarchical "principles" from the output isn't 
working out too well - YAGL, by the time it's through the process, 
something new has arisen to send the team back to the debating platform.

Those who write *for* rather than *about* Web inclusion use tools which, 
unless carefully designed, will undermine 
accessibility/usability/readability/function and IMHO between WCAG 1 and 
ATAG 1 that could now be approached fairly closely. The current document 
has the virtue of being internally politically correct by going through all 
the process that is required of a "recommendation" but in doing so makes a 
mockery of a favored mantra "it's a web, not a tree" because of the strict 
hierarchical attitude imposed with "levels of conformance", "priorities", 
and sterilized checkpoints carefully avoiding the contamination of any 
real-world examples whenever possible.

Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?

--
Love.
EACH UN-INDEXED/ANNOTATED WEB POSTING WE MAKE IS TESTAMENT TO OUR HYPOCRISY
Received on Saturday, 8 September 2001 23:18:49 GMT

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