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

Action Item: Minimum checkpoint classification

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 19:43:26 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20011018191224.00a31530@pop.erols.com>
To: W3C Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Graham suggested the simplest compliance scheme - a minimum, and everything 
else.

         With that in mind, I'd like to suggest that a useful 
classification of minimum would be the checkpoints that meet 1) hardware 
variations for input and output and 2) content needs of large groups of 
disabled folks .... the everything else would be the non-hardware related 
needs of small groups .... and those that are easy to do or done 
automatically would come "free" .... to those who want to count their beans 
above the minimum ...

         Hope I am suggesting this from a "user" standpoint, but suspect 
that any users in the small, hard to accommodate groups won't feel included 
....

         ....

         Perhaps there could be "blue light" checkpoints - ones that affect 
few people, are hard to do, and if you do them you get to put a special 
symbol on your page, if of course, you have met the minimum first ....

                                                                 Anne 




Anne Pemberton
apembert@erols.com

http://www.erols.com/stevepem
http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2001 20:56:02 GMT

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