Are you proposing a guideline or a checkpoint? Where in WCAG 2.0 does it fit? What are the success criteria? What are examples? What are definitions? Please provide a complete concrete proposal that answers all of the above questions or discontinue discussion. In other words, give me something that is in the current format of WCAG 2.0 guidelines/checkpoints. --wendy At 02:53 PM 9/27/01 , Jonathan Chetwynd wrote: >The proposed guideline: > >Please consider the spirit or tone that would introduce your content to >best effect? > >An inappropriate tone could alienate your audience. People in different >cultures have very different expectations. > >So far we have: >Jonathan, Anne, David P and CharlesMcN have expressed opinions inclined >towards something like the proposal, and recognise that it represents a >change. >CharlesFM considers it a good recommendation, but perhaps unattainable in a >set of 'normative' guidelines. >Wendy and Judy appear to be querying whether the proposal is in earnest. > >I don't have any record of other opinions. >What reason can there be for calling a halt to what is a very positive and >helpful guideline? > >I'd be grateful for a further development of this proposal. >It may well need examples, or expansion. > >jonathan chetwynd >IT teacher (LDD) >j.chetwynd@btinternet.com >http://www.peepo.com "The first and still the best picture directory >on the web" -- wendy a chisholm world wide web consortium web accessibility initiative seattle, wa usa /--Received on Thursday, 27 September 2001 15:40:12 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2007 14:55:25 GMT