- From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:59:28 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2001/12/20-minutes.html Summary of actions, resolutions, issues · Resolved: move forward on 2 day meeting after CSUN (23/24 March) · Unresolved: not sure where to meet after March. Suggestion is in conjunction with ASSETS in Scotland July 8-10 2002. · Action GV: write a proposal for 2.4 by the end of the week. · Issue: We came up with several categories of interactions that require timed responses. Will we include these in the Guidelines/Checkpoints or in Techniques? · Next meeting is 3 January. We had a good discussion about what types of things Checkpoint 2.4 might be applied to and what types of things should have exceptions. http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2001/12/20-minutes.html#examples-2-4 For example, time-outs on sites for security and privacy reasons are reasonable but people should be warned when time will expire and be offered a chance to reset the clock to give them more time. An exception would be purchasing ticktes where there is a limited pool to choose from. Another thing we decided not to address was tests where time is an important factor. For example, a timed test to qualify to be a real-time captioner. Time is an important aspect of that job. Tests in general are a complex topic and one that we do not think we will directly cover with 2.4. -- wendy a chisholm world wide web consortium web accessibility initiative seattle, wa usa /--
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 18:00:17 UTC