- From: Mike Barta <mikba@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:55:37 -0800
- To: "WAI-GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I think the question was 'what are the salient differences', not why am I top posting...
The phrases are nearly identical but the statement of purpose talks to the final result, content _being_ keyboard accessible, and the SC talks to the action of the author in _designing_ the content to, hopefully, achieve that result.
Joe's point, that the author cannot guarantee the final outcome, is why the SC doesn't speak to outcome but design.
/m
η ελευθερία της ομιλίας είναι ουσιαστική στη δημοκρατία
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Joe Clark
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 5:12 PM
To: WAI-GL
Subject: Re: G 2.1 and L3SC1 are no different?
> Guideline 2.1:
> Make all functionality operable via a keyboard or a keyboard interface.
> Level 3 Success Criteria for Guideline 2.1:
> 1. All functionality of the content is designed to be
> operated through a keyboard or keyboard interface.
Both are user-agent issues that the content author cannot guarantee.
--
Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2004 19:56:06 UTC