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

RE: 4.1 wording

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 13:25:16 +1000
Message-ID: <15610.57756.310743.450568@jdc.local>
To: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Perhaps it would be best to agree first on what the success criteria
are for the three conformance levels; then return to the checkpoint
text itself to make sure that it is consistent with the success
criteria.

This strategy has worked in relation to some of the other checkpoints.

I think the real controversies surrounding 4.1 relate to what the
success criteria ought to be at each of the conformance levels. I also
expect that there will be much advisory material included under 4.1,
providing additional, non-testable but nonetheless useful, guidance to
implementors.
Received on Sunday, 2 June 2002 23:26:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:19 GMT