I'd like to suggest some changes in wording for Wendy's proposal #4. The suggestion for item b is merely editorial; the suggestion for item c may be considered substantive. Wendy wrote: Proposal #4 rewrite the minimum to read: 1. At least one of the following is true: a. content does not flicker or flash. b. flickering or flashing of content is not between 3 Hz and 55 Hz. [js]: Proposed rewording for item b: "Content does not flicker or flash in the range between 3 and 55 Hz (cycles) per second." c. if flicker is unavoidable, the user is warned of the flicker before they go to the content, and as close a version of the content as is possible without flicker is provided. [js]: Proposed rewording for item c: "If flicker is unavoidable, users are given advance notice and a method of avoiding the flickering content is provided. An equivalent alternative that does not flicker is available." John Slatin, Ph.D. Director, Institute for Technology & Learning University of Texas at Austin 1 University Station G9600 FAC 248C Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu web http://www.ital.utexas.eduReceived on Friday, 20 December 2002 09:56:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 02:50:59 GMT