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

Re: Required (at least Recommended) Reading

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 18:26:45 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20011002175909.00a2b1b0@pop.erols.com>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
William,

         Wouldn't that suggest that the purpose of the content and the 
intended audience are the aim of a web author, not the "extended" audience 
we are asking web authors to address in the Guidelines?

         Also, if we are writing specs, then call them that rather than 
Guidelines ...

         The term "Guidelines" suggests (at least to me) that the 
Guidelines are intended reading for all web authors, since there are many 
techniques to meet the "Guidelines" that are at the web author level 
(especially considering that a web author may be using Word and converting 
it to HTML) ...

         A thought - is our goal to have the web made up of "Accessible" 
web pages, or is it to be made up of pages that are accessible (as a matter 
or ordinary practice, included effortlessly in authoring programs that are 
usable to all web authors including those who demand/need/prefer WYSIWYG 
stuff ...

         A few weekends back I downloaded some software (free to educators 
who put all their products on the web) that has an input screen to create a 
variety of Javascript applications in the kinds of activities kids like to 
do online ... matching, fill in the blanks, etc. After Jim Ley helped me 
add a stylesheet to the script, I spent a few hours trying to understand 
Javascript .... and, well, after pooling all relatives who may know Java 
and coming up with only bugging Jim til I learn it, I guess I gotta go buy 
a book ...!  Now that I've seen what Javascript can do (and especially with 
style sheets), I'm not only eager to try more Javascript, but I see it as 
solutions to educational problems ... the downside is that Jim says the 
software is generating lousy code .... and when I read thru the script, I 
saw some stupid remarks, but I also noted it is supposed to be OK'd with 
W3C for whatever date in the script docs .... what is a poor teacher to do???

                                                 Anne

At 07:27 AM 10/2/01 -0700, William Loughborough wrote:
>The frequent complaints about the unreadability of the documents GL works 
>on are compellingly addressed and IMO well answered in a nice piece:
>http://www.alistapart.com/stories/readspec/
>
>
>
>--
>Love.
>EACH UN-INDEXED/ANNOTATED WEB POSTING WE MAKE IS TESTAMENT TO OUR HYPOCRISY

Anne Pemberton
apembert@erols.com

http://www.erols.com/stevepem
http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 18:29:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:16 GMT