W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal

From: Yvette Hoitink <y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 22:00:45 +0200
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E1DTmWf-0006bo-71@lisa.w3.org>

Andi Snow Weaver asked:
> 
> Level 1 SC 3: "For each reference to another delivery unit, a 
> title or description of that delivery unit can be 
> programatically determined.", I have two questions:
> 
> -  this is already covered in GL 3.2 Level 2 SC 6. Are you 
> proposing that we have two success criteria that address this 
> or are you proposing that we remove the GL 3.2 success criteria?
> 

GL 3.2 level 2 SC 6 is specifically about link text. That's a more specific
version of what I was trying to say, thank you for pointing that out. With
this new SC, I think the 3.2 SC is redundant because it's already covered. I
think the most important reasons for providing a title or description is
orientation, so I think this SC belongs in 2.4 rather than 3.2.

> - what is the rationale for moving this to Level 1?
> 

I hadn't realized a similar SC was in 3.2 so didn't purposely promote this
to level 1. I thought a guideline like this could be at level 1 because it
can be done in markup and doesn't require any changes to the visual
presentation. However, this would mean that we forbid 'read more' links
unless they have a title-attribute like <a href="otherpage.html"
title="Title of other page">Read more</a>. Most of today's content
management systems don't offer that possibility so it would cause a lot of
problems. In retrospect, this SC might be better of at level 2.

Yvette Hoitink
Heritas, Enschede, the Netherlands
E-mail: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl
WWW: http://www.heritas.nl 
Received on Thursday, 5 May 2005 20:00:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:37 UTC