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

Re: EO's document for review

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 13:11:42 -0500 (EST)
To: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
cc: "_W3C-WAI Web Content Access. Guidelines List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0111041309390.12068-100000@tux.w3.org>
Yes, I think some idea of why it is worth doing more than level-A (at least
for WCAG 1) would be a good thing for this grop to contribute to, both at a
technical and where practical a business case level.

A particular point is that there are some groups who are apparently not well
served by low levels of accessibility,and for whom it is particularly
imortant to have a sufficiently high level that they can participate in
relevant activities.

Chaals

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Lisa Seeman wrote:

  If I am meant to be discussing this hear...

  I think it would be interesting to make a case for "general / minimum
  accessibility" and a separate case for total AAA+, state of the art,
  accessibility. , and see if we can not undo some of the "I am bobby
  approved and that is enough" attitude.

  All the best,

  Lisa Seeman

  1866 654 8680
  www.GlobalFormats.com
  Widen the World Web


-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Sunday, 4 November 2001 13:11:44 GMT

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