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

BIG ISSUES REVISED 9-20-01 (SEE BOTTOM OF NOTE)

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:43:49 -0500
To: "GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <006101c1422e$18d314e0$b2176880@trace.wisc.edu>

In today's meetings we were able to remove the following items from the
BIG ISSUES OPEN list.   Here are the closed ones... The updated list is
at the bottom.


NOTE:
BIG ISSUES are issues that span many guidelines or which affect the
guidelines but would not be touched on in discussions of individual
guidelines or checkpoints.

-------------------------
ITEMS  2 & 4 were removed since they were determined to be part of
specific guidelines.

2. User literacy level  -   (is this is a sub part of 3.3 /3.4
discussion)
    - reading levels

4. What is an equivalent?  -
(collapsed back to 1.1)


-------------------------
ITEMS      WERE REMOVED BECAUSE THEY WERE CLOSED BY FACE TO FACE
DISCUSSION AND CONSENSUS STATEMENTS.


7. Normative vs. informative (do we need normative?)
> YES - and we created some consensus statements for what would be
normative.

8. One version for all vs. multiple versions of web content
   - client-side vs. server-side
>  Server side ok - see consensus statement.

11. Do we intend guidelines to be used by regulators and
requirements-setters (e.g., in companies)?
> YES - see consensus statement.

-------------------------
ITEMS     WERE CLOSED IN TODAYS DISCUSSION.


3. Differences by language  (CMN)
COLLAPSED INTO #1 AS : "...remember that the user agents available, and
their capabilities, differ for different locations, languages, and
localizations."

5. How document is interpreted by non-technical people
CONSENSUS: Our document should be written as clearly and simply as is
appropriate for the content, with links to definitions.    We should go
with the clearest and simplest language that someone can propose as long
as it is accurate.

We also had the following consensus candidate for #1 but we did not
close it yet

RE:  BROWSERS
B1 - Techniques should specify if particular browsers are needed or will
not work with the technique.  Or they should specify if they require
particular technologies.  e.g.  You must have CSS2 support for this
technique to work.


-------------------------
THAT LEAVES THE FOLLOWING AS THE NEW OPEN BIG ISSUES LIST

                  BIG ISSUES LIST   9-20-01

BIG ISSUES are issues that span many guidelines or which affect the
guidelines but would not be touched on in discussions of individual
guidelines or checkpoints.

1. Baseline browser capabilities
      - in general
      - in specific contexts (intranet, public kiosk)
      - remember that the user agent's available, and their
capabilities, differ for different locations, languages, and
localizations.    (was item 3)

6. Implementation
(Should difficulty in implementation affect priority.)

9. Access for absolutely all?    - If not, how to draw line
(one suggestion was  "BEST EFFORT")

10. Guidelines for all sites vs. special sites

12. Accessibility vs. usability

13. Conformance - why do it? How to test?

14. Author and user needs conflict

15. User and user needs conflict
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2001 19:43:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:14 GMT