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

RE: URI references - in conformance

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 14:43:26 -0600
To: <lguarino@adobe.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <auto-000154032404@spamarrest.com>

I was going to say Probably - but then asked 
"Harder than what?"  

I have been wrestling with ways to do conformance for site sections.  
Haven't come up with much - but we need more than one option I think.
 
Gregg

  

-----Original Message-----
From: lguarino@adobe.com [mailto:lguarino@adobe.com] 
 

I think this would make it much more likely that owners of large web sites
would post a claim. So I think it is a good thing. But will it make it
harder for a user to determine the status of a particular URI within that
tree?

Loretta

----- Original Message -----
From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:01 pm
Subject: URI references - in conformance

> Should we consider allowing people to claim conformance  by URI root
> 
> 
> 
> For example 
> 
> 
> 
> All content at  Trace.wisc.edu/public/    meets   xxxx
> 
> 
> 
> Or 
> 
> All content at Trace.wisc.edu except  trace.wisc.edu/deeparchive/  
> meets
> yyyy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gregg
> 
> ------------------------
> 
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
> Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center 
> University of Wisconsin-Madison 
> < <http://trace.wisc.edu/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-
> 8848  
> For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/
> 
> <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2004 20:43:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:32 GMT