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

RE: The Order of Checkpoint Priorities

From: Geoff Deering <gdeering@acslink.net.au>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 06:23:36 +1100
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
Cc: "WAI GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NBBBJPNFCLNLAADCLFJBCEBMDEAA.gdeering@acslink.net.au>
Points taken and agreed.

Summary: I agree with you in principle, but think that we are not ready to
resolve this issue yet.

Hi Geoff, I think there are two issues here. One is whether priority is a
good ordering principle within a guideline, and I believe that it is. I
that is not a very cntroversial idea, but at this stage we haven't
prioritised the guidelines/checkpoints/techniques or decided finally exactly
which parts should carry priority.

Seperately, there is a question of whether a different order is more useful
for learning (or for that matter for some other audience). Although I agree
with you about a different order being helpful for helping people to learn
the principles of accessibility, I am not sure that we should be trying to
decide the best order of presentation before we have settled threquirements
being listed. (I realise that they are to some extent inter-related, so we
may go a couple of cycles of each step influencing the other a bit when we
get there).



On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Geoff Deering wrote:


  If the Guidelines are to be intended in order of Priority in the future,
  it worth addressing this issue now, or when they are more refined?

  I feel they could better address the nature of structured web development
  reordering them.  There can be an advantage to reorder them in helping to
  prioritize the issues for communicating and identifying the major issues
  the development of Web Content, as applied to Accessibility.

Received on Tuesday, 8 January 2002 14:23:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:40 UTC