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

Re: Minimum Set = eliminate barriers with aid of AT (reformulated).

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 09:48:10 +1100
Message-ID: <15327.11818.508393.265118@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
To: Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Graham Oliver writes:
 > Jason
 > Would it be possible to give a couple of checkpoint
 > examples that fall _outside_ the minimum set as
 > defined.
 > This will help my understanding of the definition

The same examples apply as in Wendy's original proposal. I would
suggest a careful reading of the checkpoint-by-checkpoint analysis in
Wendy's original message:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2001OctDec/0151.html

Much of the confusion in recent discussions is due, I think, to
various working group members' having somewhat different conceptions
of what is meant by the several proposals that have been advanced. We
need to eliminate the misunderstandings so that we can concentrate
firmly upon analysing the merits of the options which have been put
forward, and arrive at creative solutions.

The "Eliminate Barriers with aid of relevant AT" principle is meant to
be a recasting of OTACS 2, but from a user's perspective which makes
the access benefit explicit while drawing the same distinction between
core and non-core checkpoints.
Received on Tuesday, 30 October 2001 17:48:24 GMT

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