W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: Agenda

From: lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 01:52:19 -0700
To: jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au, Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-id: <004101c1fcb6$fdf00ea0$5d93003e@patirsrv.patir.com>
I can not make it as it is a Jewish festival tonight.

my comments are:
1, I like Kynns modular approach much better. We need a more flexible system
if we are not going to discriminate against some disabilities within the
guidelines (even if it is just in terms of numbers)

2 on
" Absolute essentials.  If these aren't done - most everyone in a major
disability group can't access the information.  (e.g. no
Please note the largest disabilities groups are thoughs with cognitive
disabilities. There needs must be addressed as P1 or equivalent.

Minimal conformance to a guideline may require some testability. That does
not  mean that checkpoints without testability need to be demoted for
prioritization levels as well.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason White" <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
To: "Web Content Guidelines" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 4:53 PM
Subject: Agenda

> Thursday, 16 May, 20:00 UTC - 4 PM US Eastern, 10 PM France, 6 AM
> Eastern Australia, on +1-617-252-1038:
> 1. The conformance scheme. See Gregg's latest summary to the list at
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002AprJun/0266.html
> 2. Guideline 5. Issues related to guideline 5 arose at last week's
>    meeting; thus it seems best to address them directly. Note that
>    Cynthia's proposed reworking of guideline 5 is included in the
>    latest internal working draft.
Received on Thursday, 16 May 2002 03:52:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:41 UTC