W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2003

RE: Action item: proposed rewording for Checkpoint 4.2, Criterion 1

From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:19:09 -0500
Message-ID: <B3DC65CD2AA7EF449E554548C6FE1111E0A401@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu>
To: <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>, "Web Content Guidelines" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Thanks, Jason (and Gregg)!

I'll accept either "at least one of these technologies" or "one or more
of these technologies" as a friendly amendment.  "One or more" is
probably better.  But then another question arises: is there some upper
limit? If a given user has *none* of the technologies on the list, do we
still require that he or she be able to access and use the resource?
That, I think, would make a mockery of this criterion (which may be an
argument in favor of eliminating it altogether).

John



John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web http://www.ital.utexas.edu
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Jason White [mailto:jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au] 
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:24 am
To: Web Content Guidelines
Subject: Re: Action item: proposed rewording for Checkpoint 4.2,
Criterion 1



With thanks to John and Cynthia for completing this action item so
expeditiously, my comments appear below.

John M Slatin writes:
 > 
 > 1.    The Web resource includes a list of the technologies users must
 > have in order for its content to work as intended.  Users who do not
> have some of these technologies can still access and use the resource,
> though the experience may be degraded.

I agree with Gregg: this is better than the original wording, putting
aside the question of whether checkpoint 4.2 should be included in the
guidelines at all, which I acknowledge remains an open issue.

I assume you intend "some" in the above proposal to mean "at least one".
Is this potentially ambiguous? Should it be clarified, for example by
saying "at least one of these technologies" or "one or more of these
technologies"?

Whoever interprets "some" as meaning "more than one" will argue that
content for which there is only one such technology, i.e., a technology
the non-availability of which does not cause the content to become
inoperable, doesn't meet the success criterion.
Received on Thursday, 19 June 2003 09:19:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:22 GMT