W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: Verified issues - week of 26 April

From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 10:27:38 -0500 (CDT)
To: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405021025350.24393-100000@socrates.scdns.net>

> Verified issues: we think they are closed, but confirming with the
> reviewer.

Not quite, I don't think.


> Issue 700 - Examples of ambiguous contracted words?

Many English uses of "it's." But what's the big deal? Who cares? And where 
is the *evidence* (as opposed to supposition) that this harms any disabled 
person?

Homographs and polysemic words are features of many languages. The Web 
Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 will be laughed out of town if it 
even flirts with the idea of forcing us to use markup like <span title="it 
has">it's</span>.

And I wouldn't advise people to bring up the similar case of adding nikud 
to Hebrew.

-- 

    Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
    Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
    Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Sunday, 2 May 2004 11:27:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:29 GMT