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

RE: Agenda

From: <gian@stanleymilford.com.au>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 16:51:24 +1000
Message-Id: <H00000e000527895.1028789483.tux.sofcom.com.au@MHS>
TO: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

regrets... won't be able to make it next week either :( 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason White [mailto:jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 2:13 am
> To: Web Content Guidelines
> Subject: Agenda
> 
> 
> 
> Thursday, 8 August, 2000 UTC (4 PM US Eastern, 10 PM France, 
> 6 AM Eastern
> Australia) on +1-617-761-6200 passcode 9224.
> 
> Agenda
> 
> 1. Principles for allocating success criteria among the three
>    conformance levels:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002JulSep/0122.html
> 
> See also the proposed consensus items at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002JulSep/0123.html
> (these aren't expected to be controversial as they reflect 
> choices already
> taken by the group).
> 
> 2. Level 2 assurance requirements:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002JulSep/0114.html
> 
> 3. Checklist generation (combining guidelines with technology-specific
>    material from techniques documents). What should be included in
>    checklists and how should they be created?
> 
> 4. Checkpoint 5.3 (issue raised last week). How can the success
>    criteria be defined more precisely? Is there an overlap with
>    checkpoint 5.2 (see checkpoint 5.3, success criterion 3)?
> 
> 5. Checkpoints 1.3 and 3.1: the principles are distinct, but there
>    appears to be an overlap in the success criteria themselves which
>    should be corrected. Also, surely a "linear reading order" should
>    be at levels 1 or 2?
> 
> Any items in this list not considered at the meeting will be 
> placed on next
> week's agenda.
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 8 August 2002 02:48:39 GMT

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