RE: [TECH] links

I like the idea of using business terms to apply to the WCAG since this
makes it more clear what the relationship between the documents is. This
will be especially helpful for the managers who have to decide what level of
accessibility to support. Many managers I know tend not te be hampered by
any knowledge about the WWW and would love it if they can see at a glance
which are strategic documents and which are operational details that they
don't have to bother with. 
 
However, I was a bit confused by the terms you used. Here in the Netherlands
and in the American management studies books I studied, short-term is called
"operational" and mid-term "tactical", which is the other way around from
what you describe. Did you make a mistake or are the terms used differently
where you come from? If the terms are used with different meanings around
the world, we may have to think about other terms.
 
Yvette Hoitink

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of David MacDonald
Sent: woensdag 20 augustus 2003 14:59
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; 'Wendy A Chisholm'; 'Michael Cooper'
Subject: [TECH] links



Further to our meeting last week there was an action item to put forward a
proposal for the handling of text links in the Techniques 2.0 document.  It
is important to note the context of the Techniques document as juxtaposed to
the Guidelines. The WCAG Guidelines, should have some longevity because of
their platform & technology independence.  On the other hand the Techniques
document should reflect current technology, its uses, and what's practical
in the near term. 

It might be helpful to draw an analogy between WCAG documents and business
planning concepts.  One might consider the Guidelines a "Strategic" planning
document (long term), the Gateway an "Operational" planning document (mid
term), and the Techniques document a "Tactical" planning document (Short
term). (Go nice Joe this is just an analogy).

 [snip]