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

Re: First Stab at Set of Principles for 'Minimum Conformance'

From: Graham Oliver <graham_oliver@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:36:14 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <20011025093614.61546.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com>
To: seeman@netvision.net.il
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Hi Lisa

My responses to your responses between <GO> and </GO>
<snip>

>> 4. The inclusion of a Guideline in the minimum
>> should not disadvantage anyone.

> Why? If the benefit to most is substantial, and
> though who are disadvantaged are not greatly 
> disadvantaged.

<GO>
This was taken from the information that I received
from the person here in New Zealand who was
instrumental in the introduction of the bricks and
mortar accessibility guidelines.
It was (I believe) a principle accepted by the New
Zealand disabled people involved in that process.
</GO>

>>5. The more people that benefit from a Guideline
>>the stronger the case for inclusion in the Minimum.
>
> Prejudice - It should be the extent of the
> difficulty not the amount of
> people who suffer should determine its inclusion.

<GO>
Could be a misunderstanding here. I am not talking
about the number of people that 'suffer' from a
disability. Rather I am looking at the
'universability' of a guideline.
The idea that the 'curb cuts' help everyone, that kind
of thing.
Perhaps a better way to express 

5. The more universal the benefit that arises from a
Guideline the stronger the case for inclusion in the
Minimum.
</GO>

>> 6. The Guideline must be easy to implement

>Well, there goes WCAG

<GO>
Just want to check that you think this is ok?
</GO>

>> 7. The Guideline must be easily verifiable (this
>> is part of the Draft Requirements)

> Again, If the only thing that allows people to
> access a page, or not be misled, is a difficult to 
> test checkpoint, should they be left out in the
> cold, on an academic criteria

<GO>
Don't think they should be left out in the cold at
all. But if we don't make guidelines that are part of
the minimum easily verifiable then how do we ensure
confomance?
</GO>

>> 9. No Guideline in the minimum must be 'technology
>> specific'

> Why?
<GO>
Don't know, scrub it <grin>
</GO>

<snip>

Cheers
Graham

=====
'Making on-line information accessible'
Mobile Phone : +64 25 919 724 - New Zealand
Work Phone : +64 9 846 6995 - New Zealand
AIM ID : grahamolivernz

____________________________________________________________
Nokia Game is on again. 
Go to http://uk.yahoo.com/nokiagame/ and join the new
all media adventure before November 3rd.
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2001 05:36:20 GMT

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