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

Re: Fwd: minutes, some before lunch, some this afternoon

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:14:14 -0400 (EDT)
To: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
cc: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0109111713320.13151-100000@tux.w3.org>
I agree that scripts are covered seperately. I disagree that 1.1 is more
fundamental, but that's philosophy that only needs to be considered if we


On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Jason White wrote:

  Interesting minutes.

  A quick suggestion: move "scripts" out of checkpoint 1.1. They are
  covered by checkpoint 4.4. The result is that an implementor can
  choose whether or not to provide an alternative to scripts, and
  therefore decide to comply (or not to comply) with checkpoint 4.4,
  without being regarded as having failed checkpoint 1.1, which everyone
  agrees is a much more fundamental requirement.

  I would also like to have a summary, after the meeting, of the
  proposals which are put forward.

  Wishing you much success at the meeting,


Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2001 17:14:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:38 UTC