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

Critera for the Minimum and Next up Set

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 20:45:24 -0600
To: "GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002801c16b24$15ec7fe0$066fa8c0@750>
This is based on a number of other peoples comments and posts... but it
seems to me that there are a number of orthogonal (independent) measures
that we need to be looking at.

1 - Essentialness to user.  (If you don’t do this they can't do that)

2 - Onerous-ness to the Author (How much effort it will take to comply)

3 - Temporal-ness   (How long this will be true for both 1 and 2)

Also please note that 1 breaks down into 1a and 1b

1a - Essentialness to the user with regular browsing technologies (and
their usual AT)

1b - Essentialness to the user if they have the best Browsing Tech/AT.

So maybe we score these indepenently.
Then make some rules for what makes it in.

Obiviously (?) we don’t put in a rule that would quadruple the cost of
websites to do.
But do we want to eliminate something or say it isn't important to
anyone just because it is hard to do?
This would eliminate that.

Only problem would be scoring on the dimensions.  Could we objectively
all agree on a score of 1 to 5 in each category for each item.


Just some thoughts to chew on.


-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Professor - Human Factors
Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis.
Director - Trace R & D Center
Gv@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <http://trace.wisc.edu/>
FAX 608/262-8848 
For a list of our listserves send “lists” to listproc@trace.wisc.edu
Received on Sunday, 11 November 2001 21:45:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:39 UTC