w3c-wai-gl@w3.org from April to June 2005: by date

Thursday, 30 June 2005
- Regrets: Agenda 6/30/05 Roberto Castaldo
- 06/30 call Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- Updated mapping of WCAG 1.0 checkpoints to WCAG 2.0 success criteria Andi Snow-Weaver
- RE: regrets, Agenda 6/30/05 Luca Mascaro
- regrets, Agenda 6/30/05 Roberto Ellero
- Re: Agenda 6/30/05 ======================= Tim Boland
- Re: Start time of WCAG telecon (was:Re: Agenda 6/30/05) Wendy Chisholm
- Re: Agenda 6/30/05 ======================= WATANABE Takayuki
- Re: Agenda 6/30/05 ======================= Makoto UEKI - Infoaxia, Inc. -
- Start time of WCAG telecon (was:Re: Agenda 6/30/05) Christophe Strobbe
- Re: Agenda 6/30/05 - partial regrets Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Probable regrets (RE: Agenda 6/30/05 =======================) Yvette Hoitink
- Regrets: Agenda 6/30/05 ======================= Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Agenda 6/30/05 ======================= lguarino@adobe.com
Monday, 27 June 2005
- Agenda 6/30/05 ======================= Gregg Vanderheiden
Thursday, 30 June 2005
- GL 1.3 issue summary against June 30 draft Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- GL 2.2 issue summary (close/clarify/not addressed) Christophe Strobbe
- [2.4] Issue summary Yvette Hoitink
Wednesday, 29 June 2005
- Fax Message Wendy
- Fwd: [Proposed Recommendation] QA Specification Guidelines Tim Boland
Monday, 27 June 2005
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Jason White
Sunday, 26 June 2005
- Web Standards Project Accessibility Task Force Joe Clark
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? Bailey, Bruce
Friday, 24 June 2005
- RE: Proposed ednote to clarify captions and transcript Yvette Hoitink
- GL 4.2 Issues Summary Loretta Guarino Reid
Thursday, 23 June 2005
- [minutes] 23 june 2005 telecon Wendy A Chisholm
- Re: Validation: what criteria in L1, L2 or L3?... Maurizio Boscarol
- Proposed ednote to clarify captions and transcript Michael Cooper
- Protected message Wendy
- Re: Agenda: 23 June Telecon - partial regrets Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- RE: regrets for today's call (06/23) Luca Mascaro
- Regrets: Agenda: 23 June Telecon Roberto Castaldo
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Joe Clark
- Re: Need 1.1 L1 SC basic requirement to provide text alternative Wendy A Chisholm
- Need 1.1 L1 SC basic requirement to provide text alternative Michael Cooper
- Reminder: Call starts early today John M Slatin
- Re: Validation: what criteria in L1, L2 or L3?... Tina Holmboe
- R: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Roberto Castaldo
- Parsing and extracting information (valid or not) Johannes Koch
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Christophe Strobbe
- Validation: what criteria in L1, L2 or L3?... Maurizio Boscarol
- regrets for today's call (06/23) Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Regrets (RE: Agenda: 23 June Telecon) WATANABE Takayuki
- Re: checklist prototype info@lucamascaro.info
- Re: checklist prototype Gez Lemon
- Re: checklist prototype boland@nist.gov
- Validity and Well-formedness Jens Meiert
- Re: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?) David Dorward
- Re: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?) Gez Lemon
- Re: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?) David Dorward
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Jason White
- RE: Summing up the debate about validity at Priority 1 or 2 Bailey, Bruce
- checklist prototype Ben Caldwell
Wednesday, 22 June 2005
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Neil Whiteley
- Reasons to move validity back to P1 Gez Lemon
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Jason White
- Re: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?) Gez Lemon
- RE: XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?) Neil Whiteley
- XHTML 1.1 as text/html (was Re: Should validity be P1 or P2?) David Dorward
- Re: Agenda: 23 June Telecon lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: remove validity completely? Joe Clark
- FW: Summing up the debate about validity at Priority 1 or 2 Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: remove validity completely? Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Summing up the debate about validity at Priority 1 or 2 Joe Clark
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Neil Whiteley
- remove validity completely? David MacDonald
- Re: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! Ineke van der Maat
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Mike Barta
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Neil Whiteley
- Re: [techs] examples for techniques requirements document Joe Clark
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Guideline 1.3 SC Ben Caldwell
- RE: content arranged in a sequence that affects meaning John M Slatin
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Tina Holmboe
- Re: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! Tina Holmboe
- content arranged in a sequence that affects meaning Ben Caldwell
- [techs] examples for techniques requirements document Wendy A Chisholm
- testing (no need to respond, still testing archives) Wendy A Chisholm
- testing (no need to respond, testing archives) Wendy A Chisholm
- RE: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! Gregg Vanderheiden
- Not over til its over - hang in there whatever your view(s). Gregg Vanderheiden
- a note on voluntary standards and policy related standards Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! John M Slatin
- Introduction: Updated version John M Slatin
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Multiple definitions for "baseline" Tim Boland
- Regrets (RE: Agenda: 23 June Telecon) Yvette Hoitink
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? Lisa Seeman
- Re: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! Gez Lemon
- RE: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- NEW: Issue #1534 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- RE: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! John M Slatin
- Agenda: 23 June Telecon John M Slatin
- ♦Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Sailesh Panchang
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Jason White
Tuesday, 21 June 2005
- RE: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! Neil Whiteley
- Re: perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! Gez Lemon
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 22 June 2005 Michael Cooper
- Sorry about double posting Lisa Seeman
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Lisa Seeman
- RE: test Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- test David MacDonald
- perhaps remove the requirement for validity completely! David MacDonald
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Joe Clark
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Christophe Strobbe
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Lisa Seeman
- R: R: R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Castaldo
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? Jens Meiert
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Tina Holmboe
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? David Dorward
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Jens Meiert
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Gez Lemon
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Tina Holmboe
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Maurizio Boscarol
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
Monday, 20 June 2005
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Gez Lemon
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Maurizio Boscarol
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Maurizio Boscarol
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Gez Lemon
- Re: R: R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Maurizio Boscarol
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Maurizio Boscarol
- R: R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Castaldo
- RE: Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Joe Clark
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Gez Lemon
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Tina Holmboe
- RE: Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Mike Barta
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Maurizio Boscarol
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) John M Slatin
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Isofarro
- RE: Fwd: Re: [TECHS] Sample Scripting Techniques with baseline information (fwd) John M Slatin
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Ineke van der Maat
- Re: Fwd: Re: [TECHS] Sample Scripting Techniques with baseline information (fwd) Isofarro
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) John M Slatin
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Ineke van der Maat
- FW: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) John M Slatin
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) David Dorward
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Ineke van der Maat
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Gez Lemon
- RE: Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Mike Barta
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) John M Slatin
- Re: R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Maurizio Boscarol
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Matt May
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Joe Clark
- RE: Another resource re: testability of WCAG2.0 guidelines and success criteria John M Slatin
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? Bailey, Bruce
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) John M Slatin
- RE: Should validity be P1 or P2? Bailey, Bruce
- Another resource re: testability of WCAG2.0 guidelines and success criteria Tim Boland
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Joe Clark
- Definition of "testable" (was: Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Joe Clark
- Fwd: Re: [TECHS] Sample Scripting Techniques with baseline information (fwd) Joe Clark
- Re: R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Maurizio Boscarol
- Should validity be P1 or P2? (was Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers) Bailey, Bruce
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Matt May
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Tim Boland
- RE: Draft Introduction to WCAG 2.0 Tim Boland
- Re: HTML/XHTML, mime-types, Strict & Transitional [was Re: Semantics] David Dorward
- RE: HTML/XHTML, mime-types, Strict & Transitional [was Re: Semantics] Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Should validity be P1 or P2? David Dorward
- Should validity be P1 or P2? (was RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days) Bailey, Bruce
- HTML/XHTML, mime-types, Strict & Transitional [was Re: Semantics] David Dorward
- Re: Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Christophe Strobbe
- RE: Draft Introduction to WCAG 2.0 Yvette Hoitink
- Draft Introduction to WCAG 2.0 John M Slatin
Sunday, 19 June 2005
- R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Castaldo
- R: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Castaldo
- RE: Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Joe Clark
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Maurizio Boscarol
Saturday, 18 June 2005
- Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) Gez Lemon
- RE: About tests 37-41 (headers) David MacDonald
- RE: Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Tina Holmboe
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Matt May
- Why is important require well-formed, validity and richness in XHTML by examples Luca Mascaro
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Maurizio Boscarol
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Tina Holmboe
- RE: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Bailey, Bruce
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Tina Holmboe
- RE: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Luca Mascaro
- RE: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Luca Mascaro
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
Friday, 17 June 2005
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Matt May
- 《EC商务周刊-资讯版》(2005年第22期总第54期) www.ec.com.cn
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Matt May
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Matt May
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Isofarro
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Isofarro
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Matt May
- Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates) Gez Lemon
- Semantics [was: Re: Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates)] Joe Clark
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Joe Clark
- Well-formed (was: Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates) Christophe Strobbe
- Re: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates Gez Lemon
- RE: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Yvette Hoitink
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Castaldo
- RE: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates Yvette Hoitink
- Re : Influence of valid code (generically) Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- Done - Revisited Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Matt May
- Re: Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Matt May
- Re: 2 levels or 3 Matt May
Thursday, 16 June 2005
- FW: 4.2 notes/proposals Gregg Vanderheiden
- Over Gregg Vanderheiden
- 2.3 Guideline revisions proposal Gregg Vanderheiden
- 2 levels or 3 Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Gez Lemon
- Over Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re : Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Castaldo
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Joe Clark
- RE: F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- F2F Proposed Resolutions Draft Updates Ben Caldwell
- Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) Vicente Luque Centeno
- Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) Vicente Luque Centeno
- Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) Vicente Luque Centeno
- RE: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Luca Mascaro
- RE: Validation as test for basic accessibility Bailey, Bruce
Wednesday, 15 June 2005
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days kerstin
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days kerstin
- Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) Chris Ridpath
- Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: About tests 37-41 (headers) Joe Clark
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Matt May
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Ineke van der Maat
- RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days David MacDonald
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Matt May
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- [TECHS] Sample Scripting Techniques with baseline information Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Matt May
- Re: Validation as test for basic accessibility Matt May
- RE: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- About tests 37-41 (headers) Vicente Luque Centeno
- About test 13 (client side image-maps) Vicente Luque Centeno
- Re: Validation as test for basic accessibility Vicente Luque Centeno
- WCAG formalization (rewriting WCAG HTML techniques as automatable rules) Vicente Luque Centeno
- RE: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
- Validation as test for basic accessibility Bailey, Bruce
- RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Mike Barta
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Wendy Chisholm
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- GL 2.2: updated proposals Christophe Strobbe
- CLOSED: Issue #777 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- CLOSED: Issue #1259 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- CLOSED: Issue #659 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- CLOSED: Issue #1422 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
Tuesday, 14 June 2005
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Matt May
- 1.4 background sound David MacDonald
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Jens Meiert
- Changes.. Wendy
- Re: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Joe Clark
- RE: summary of resolutions from last 2 days Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- YOUR PASSWORD HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY UPDATED webmaster@w3.org
- Re: Proposals from June 13 Face to Face Tim Boland
- RE: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Level 3 Tim Boland
- RE: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Bailey, Bruce
- RE: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
- Re: R: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers info@lucamascaro.info
- R: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
- Re: Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Jason White
Monday, 13 June 2005
- Proposals from June 13 Face to Face Ben Caldwell
- Re-post: Influence of valid code on screen readers Joe Clark
- Re: Definition of "semantics" Jens Meiert
- Re: Definition of "semantics" Joe Clark
- Re: Definition of "semantics" Jens Meiert
- Re: Definition of "semantics" Joe Clark
- Re: Level 3 Jason White
- Re: Definition of "semantics" Jason White
Sunday, 12 June 2005
- Re: Definition of "semantics" Jens Meiert
- Definition of "semantics" Joe Clark
Saturday, 11 June 2005
- RE: Level 3 Joe Clark
- NEW: Issue #1533 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
Friday, 10 June 2005
- RE: Protected message Wendy
- Updated Survey for 4.1 Ben Caldwell
- 3.2 Proposal version 2 Li, Alex
- NEW: Issue #1531 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- NEW: Issue #1530 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- Updated survey for Guideline 2.5 Wendy Chisholm
- Updated survey for guideline 3.1 Wendy Chisholm
- Re: Late Regrets: 9 June 2005 Agenda [================================= WATANABE Takayuki
- Late Regrets: 9 June 2005 Agenda [================================= Makoto UEKI - Infoaxia, Inc. -
Thursday, 9 June 2005
- Input for F2F on Guide and general techniques David MacDonald
- Regrets: 9 June 2005 Agenda (for Luca Mascaro) Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
Friday, 10 June 2005
- Regrets: 9 June 2005 Agenda [================================= Roberto Castaldo
Wednesday, 8 June 2005
- Updated: 9 June 2005 Agenda Wendy Chisholm
- Issue summary for the guidelines document in general Wendy Chisholm
- Re: Issue Summary 1.4 Tim Boland
- 9 June 2005 Agenda [================================= Gregg Vanderheiden
- Conformance Issues Andi Snow-Weaver
- RE: 3.1: Action item re foreign passages Li, Alex
- GL 2.5 Remaining 3 issues Andi Snow-Weaver
- Issue Summary 1.4 Gregg Vanderheiden
- CLOSED: Issue #478 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- CLOSED: Issue #503 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- Updated proposal for Guideline 1.1 Wendy Chisholm
- NEW: Issue #1528 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- NEW: Issue #1529 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- Re: [techs] Techniques Teleconference 08 June 2005 boland@nist.gov
Tuesday, 7 June 2005
- Re: 3.1: Action item re foreign passages Matt May
- RE: [techs] Techniques Teleconference 08 June 2005 John M Slatin
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 08 June 2005 Michael Cooper
- * Can we Start 1 hour early for Thursday call???? Gregg Vanderheiden
- [2.1] Guideline summary and new proposal Yvette Hoitink
- RE: 3.1: Action item re foreign passages John M Slatin
- Re: 3.1: Action item re foreign passages Tim Boland
- 3.1: Action item re foreign passages John M Slatin
- Agenda for Techniques portion of Face to Face, 15 - 16 June 2005 Michael Cooper
- CLOSED: Issue #1355 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- 3.1: Another update John M Slatin
Monday, 6 June 2005
- [TECHS] Review of SC with respect to Scripting and baseline issues. Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- RE: Level 3 Gregg Vanderheiden
- Level 3 Matt May
- Re: GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) Ineke van der Maat
- RE: GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) John M Slatin
- RE: GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) Joe Clark
Sunday, 5 June 2005
- RE: GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) Joe Clark
- RE: GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) Gregg Vanderheiden
- GL 2.2: new benefit (low computer literacy) Christophe Strobbe
Saturday, 4 June 2005
- CLOSED: Issue #965 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
Friday, 3 June 2005
- Reminder: straw poll for 2.4 Yvette Hoitink
- Agenda: 13-16 June meeting in Brussels John M Slatin
- [techs] [Fwd: ACCESSKEY heats up] Wendy Chisholm
Thursday, 2 June 2005
- [minutes] 2 June 2005 telecon Wendy Chisholm
- [1.3] Alternative proposal for guideline text Yvette Hoitink
- regrets for today's call Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- Re: 3.1: Another update to the proposal Lisa Seeman
- Regrets: Agenda: 2 June 2005 Makoto UEKI - Infoaxia, Inc. -
Friday, 3 June 2005
- Regrets: Agenda: 2 June 2005 Roberto Castaldo
Thursday, 2 June 2005
- Re: Agenda Update: 2 June 2005 boland@nist.gov
- RE: Text being imperceptible (allegedly) boland@nist.gov
- Provide Feedback on Straw poll forms Gregg Vanderheiden
Wednesday, 1 June 2005
- RE: Text being imperceptible (allegedly) John M Slatin
- Text being imperceptible (allegedly) Joe Clark
- Agenda Update: 2 June 2005 John M Slatin
- [techs] Minutes for 01 June Techniques teleconference Michael Cooper
- RE: GL 3.2 proposal and summary Li, Alex
- Agenda: 2 June 2005 John M Slatin
- Re: Updated proposal for GL 1.3 L1 SC2 Joe Clark
- Re: [techs] Techniques Teleconference 01 June 2005 boland@nist.gov
- RE: GL 3.2 proposal and summary John M Slatin
- June 1 Draft Ben Caldwell
- RE: GL 3.2 proposal and summary Li, Alex
- Re: Freedom of speech (Was RE: Another update to the proposal) Avi Arditti
- Freedom of speech (Was RE: Another update to the proposal) Yvette Hoitink
- Re: Another update to the proposal Ineke van der Maat
- 3.1: Another update to the proposal John M Slatin
- CLOSED: Issue #802 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- CLOSED: Issue #1501 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- CLOSED: Issue #1225 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- CLOSED: Issue #1500 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- regrets, June 2 lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: Updated proposal for GL 1.3 L1 SC2 Jason White
Tuesday, 31 May 2005
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 01 June 2005 Michael Cooper
- Updated proposal for GL 1.3 L1 SC2 Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- [2.4] New proposal for guideline 2.4 Yvette Hoitink
- Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Tim Boland
Monday, 30 May 2005
- Re: Hello Wendy
Saturday, 28 May 2005
- Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Ineke van der Maat
- CLOSED: Issue #1457 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Gregg Vanderheiden
Friday, 27 May 2005
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Yvette Hoitink
- Re: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Ineke van der Maat
- Re: Usability issues in Ajax/Web applications (with implications for accessibility) Jens Meiert
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Yvette Hoitink
- Re: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Ineke van der Maat
- RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Joe Clark
- RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Joe Clark
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Gregg Vanderheiden
- points to Ponder Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Usability issues in Ajax/Web applications (with implications for accessibility) Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call John M Slatin
- Usability issues in Ajax/Web applications (with implications for accessibility) Joe Clark
- Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Ineke van der Maat
- Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Ineke van der Maat
- RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Yvette Hoitink
- RE: 3.1: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Tim Boland
- Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Ineke van der Maat
- RE: 3.1: Proposal with updates from 26 May call John M Slatin
- Re: 3.1: Proposal with updates from 26 May call Tim Boland
- 3.1: Proposal with updates from 26 May call John M Slatin
- (very minor) addition to 25 May 2005 WCAG TTF minutes? Tim Boland
- Re: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Ineke van der Maat
- Re: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Jason White
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half 2 Gregg Vanderheiden
Thursday, 26 May 2005
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Joe Clark
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half 2 Joe Clark
- Re: 3.1: Proposal with several updated SC Joe Clark
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Joe Clark
- [minutes] 26 May 2005 telecon Wendy Chisholm
- Regrets: Agenda: 26 May 2005 Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Christophe Strobbe
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Ineke van der Maat
- regrets: Agenda: 26 May 2005 Roberto Ellero
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Carlos A Velasco
- Re: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Ineke van der Maat
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half John M Slatin
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half 2 Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Joe Clark
- Regrets: Agenda: 26 May 2005 ========================= WATANABE Takayuki
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: RE 3.1 proposal - first half John M Slatin
- Re: Agenda: 26 May 2005 ========================= Makoto UEKI - Infoaxia, Inc. -
- Re: RE 3.1 proposal - first half Ineke van der Maat
- 3.1 REQUIRING NON-TEXT ALTERNATES TO TEXT Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE 3.1 proposal - first half Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Jason White
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions Jason White
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions Jason White
- RE: GL 3.2 proposal and summary Jason White
- Re: Responses to comments on GL 3.1 proposal Jason White
Wednesday, 25 May 2005
- Re: Agenda: 26 May 2005 ========================= Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- RE: GL 3.2 proposal and summary John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: Agenda: 26 May 2005 (with corrected guideline 2.2 survey link) Ben Caldwell
- Agenda: 26 May 2005 ========================= Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions Joe Clark
- Responses to comments on GL 3.1 proposal John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Christophe Strobbe
- Re: 3.1: Proposal with several updated SC Jason White
Tuesday, 24 May 2005
- Re: GL 3.2 proposal and summary Loretta Guarino Reid
- 3.1: Proposal with several updated SC John M Slatin
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 25 May 2005 Michael Cooper
- Guideline 4.1 (use-spec) Issue Summary Ben Caldwell
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Christophe Strobbe
- GL 3.2 proposal and summary Li, Alex
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: [TECHS] Techniques issues summary for Guideline 2.5 David MacDonald
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 [definition of text] Christophe Strobbe
- Re: "Accessibility features" Jason White
- GL 2.2 proposals and issue summary Christophe Strobbe
- RE: [TECHS] Techniques issues summary for Guideline 2.5 Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Outside expert opinion on Web standards and WCAG (especially GL 1.3) Jason White
- Re: "Accessibility features" Jason White
Monday, 23 May 2005
- Re: "Accessibility features" lguarino@adobe.com
- [TECHS] Techniques issues summary for Guideline 2.5 Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- RE: Ill-defined terms in WCAG 2 Gregg Vanderheiden
- Outside expert opinion on Web standards and WCAG (especially GL 1.3) Joe Clark
- Ill-defined terms in WCAG 2 Joe Clark
- "Accessibility features" Joe Clark
- Further articles documenting the sense of "semantics" Joe Clark
- Items to keep in mind for Principle 3: "Content and controls must be understandable" Joe Clark
- Re: Bugzilla down? Ben Caldwell
- Bugzilla down? Li, Alex
- Re: [minutes] 19 May 2005 WCAG WG telecon lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: move proposed SC to GL 1.3? lguarino@adobe.com
Saturday, 21 May 2005
- NEW: Issue #1526 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
Friday, 20 May 2005
- [4.1] Article on when to create custom DTD's (and when not to) John M Slatin
- CLOSED: Issue #180 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- late regrets: David MacDonald
Thursday, 19 May 2005
- Re: [minutes] 19 May 2005 WCAG WG telecon Joe Clark
- [minutes] 19 May 2005 WCAG WG telecon Wendy Chisholm
- Regrets: Agenda 19 May 2005 Roberto Castaldo
- Regrets for today's call (05/19) Roberto Ellero
- Regrets for today's call (05/19) Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- RE: Agenda + Announcement: 19 May 2005 Yvette Hoitink
- Re: Regrets for this evening WATANABE Takayuki
- Regrets for this evening (R. Scano and L. Mascaro) Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
- Re: addition proposal, GL 4.2 Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
- NEW: Issue #1525 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- RE: addition proposal, GL 4.2 Jason White
Wednesday, 18 May 2005
- possible regrets for Thursday plus suggestion? Tim Boland
- RE: addition proposal, GL 4.2 Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: addition proposal, GL 4.2 Michael Cooper
- Agenda + Announcement: 19 May 2005 John M Slatin
- RE: GL 2.5 Issues Summary and Proposal Andi Snow-Weaver
Tuesday, 17 May 2005
- ISSUE SuMMARY for 2.3 Avoiding Content that provokes siezures Gregg Vanderheiden
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 18 May 2005 Michael Cooper
Monday, 16 May 2005
- Re: move proposed SC to GL 1.3? Joe Clark
- [techs] regrets for Wednesday's WCAG TTF call Tim Boland
- Re: addition proposal, GL 4.2 Joe Clark
- RE: [Techs] proposed definitions re: my May 11 WCAG TTF Action Item John M Slatin
- GL 4.2: Revised modification to the conformance section lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: [Techs] proposed definitions re: my May 11 WCAG TTF Action Item Lisa Seeman
- addition proposal, GL 4.2 lguarino@adobe.com
- [Techs] proposed definitions re: my May 11 WCAG TTF Action Item Tim Boland
Saturday, 14 May 2005
- Re: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" (re-send) Jason White
- Re: RE: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" (re-send) lguarino@adobe.com
Friday, 13 May 2005
- RE: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" (re-send) John M Slatin
- RE: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, John M Slatin
- Late regrets: Agenda: 12 May 2005 Roberto Ellero
- RE: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, Mike Barta
- move proposed SC to GL 1.3? Loretta Guarino Reid
- Re: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" (re-send) Joe Clark
- Re: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, Tim Boland
- Re: Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" (re-send) Jason White
- Declaring educational level Jason White
- late Regrets: Agenda update: 12 May 2005 WATANABE Takayuki
- changing state and value programmatically Loretta Guarino Reid
Thursday, 12 May 2005
- Bare-bones proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" (re-send) Joe Clark
- Regrets for 12 May 2005 call Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- Regrets: Agenda: 12 May 2005 Neil Soiffer
- Regrets: Agenda: 12 May 2005 Roberto Castaldo
- Re: JavaScript action example Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Re: 3.1: Proposal with links to Guide docs WATANABE Takayuki
- JavaScript action example Joe Clark
- Agenda addendum: link to proposed SC for GL 1.3 John M Slatin
- Regrets (RE: Agenda update: 12 May 2005) Yvette Hoitink
- Why 2GL .4 isn't on the agenda this week John M Slatin
- Agenda update: 12 May 2005 John M Slatin
- Baseline definition Loretta Guarino Reid
Wednesday, 11 May 2005
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions lguarino@adobe.com
- [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Ben Caldwell
- Re: Agenda: 12 May 2005 Tim Boland
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions Sailesh Panchang
- Re: [techs] Minutes of 11 May 2005 Techniques teleconference Ben Caldwell
- RE: 3.1: Proposal with links to Guide docs Joe Clark
- [techs] Minutes of 11 May 2005 Techniques teleconference Michael Cooper
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline Neil Soiffer
- RE: 3.1: Proposal with links to Guide docs John M Slatin
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions lguarino@adobe.com
- RE: Implications of proposed baseline definitions John M Slatin
- Re: Implications of proposed baseline definitions Tim Boland
- Fwd: Test Development FAQ released Tim Boland
- Implications of proposed baseline definitions Jason White
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline 'Jason White'
Tuesday, 10 May 2005
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 11 May 2005 Michael Cooper
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- regrets Luca Mascaro
- Re: 3.1: Proposal with links to Guide docs Lisa Seeman
- regrets Lisa Seeman
- RE: working definition of baseline Michael Cooper
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Michael Cooper
- Agenda: 12 May 2005 John M Slatin
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline 'Jason White'
Monday, 9 May 2005
- [Techs] Regrets for Wednesday John M Slatin
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline 'Jason White'
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline 'Jason White'
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline Jason White
- RE: (1.3) Validation and semantics recap John M Slatin
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline John M Slatin
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline Jason White
Sunday, 8 May 2005
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
Saturday, 7 May 2005
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline lguarino@adobe.com
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Jason White
- Re: working definition of baseline Jason White
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline Jason White
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline Jason White
Friday, 6 May 2005
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline lguarino@adobe.com
- (1.3) Validation and semantics recap Joe Clark
- RE: working definition of baseline John M Slatin
- RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: working definition of baseline lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline Tim Boland
- RE: RE: working definition of baseline John M Slatin
- RE: working definition of baseline Mike Barta
- Re: RE: working definition of baseline lguarino@adobe.com
- RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: working definition of baseline John M Slatin
- RE: working definition of baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: [Techs-scripting]FW: setting focus on a form field using javascript Jim Ley
- Stevie Wonder does music video with audio description John M Slatin
- [Techs-scripting]FW: setting focus on a form field using javascript John M Slatin
- Re: working definition of baseline Jason White
- Re: working definition of baseline Jason White
- Re: working definition of baseline Alan Chuter
- Re: working definition of baseline Jason White
Thursday, 5 May 2005
- working definition of baseline lguarino@adobe.com
- about semantical use of markup Luca Mascaro
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Yvette Hoitink
- regrets: Agenda with updated links: 5 May 2005 Roberto Ellero
- User agent assumptions - vs - baseline Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: GL 2.5 Issues Summary and Proposal John M Slatin
- Re: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal John M Slatin
- Re: GL 2.5 Issues Summary and Proposal Ben Caldwell
- Regrets: Agenda with updated links: 5 May 2005 Neil Soiffer
- Re: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Ben Caldwell
- RE: RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Yvette Hoitink
- Regrets: Agenda with updated links: 5 May 2005 Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
- Regrets: Agenda with updated links: 5 May 2005 WATANABE Takayuki
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal John M Slatin
- Re: RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal John M Slatin
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Tim Boland
- Agenda with updated links: 5 May 2005 John M Slatin
- Re: RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal lguarino@adobe.com
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Li, Alex
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Jason White
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal John M Slatin
- RE: 3.1 comments John M Slatin
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: 3.1 comments Ineke van der Maat
Wednesday, 4 May 2005
- RE: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal John M Slatin
- Re: Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Andi Snow-Weaver
- 3.1 Issue summary John M Slatin
- RE: [2.4] Proposal for guideline 2.4 Yvette Hoitink
- 3.1 comments Lisa Seeman
- RE: [TECHS] Techniques Issues for Guideline 1.3 - plain text version Joe Clark
- Re: 3.1: Proposal with links to Guide docs Joe Clark
- Re: [2.4] Proposal for guideline 2.4 Andi Snow-Weaver
- regrets for 5 May telecon Christophe Strobbe
- RE: Agenda: 5 May 2005 Li, Alex
- RE: [TECHS] Techniques Issues for Guideline 1.3 - plain text version John M Slatin
- overview of 3.1: Proposal with links to Guide docs Lisa Seeman
- Agenda + [2.4] CORRECT version of 2.4 proposal Yvette Hoitink
- Agenda: 5 May 2005 John M Slatin
- programmatically determined Lisa Seeman
- 3.1: Proposal with links to Guide docs John M Slatin
- NEW: Issue #1523 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- NEW: Issue #1524 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- Revised Proposal, GL 4.2 Loretta Guarino Reid
Tuesday, 3 May 2005
- GL 2.5 Issues Summary and Proposal Andi Snow-Weaver
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 04 May 2005 Michael Cooper
- RE: RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Loretta Guarino Reid
- [tech] 4.2 Summary David MacDonald
- [techs] requirements updated Michael Cooper
- RE: Guideline 1.3 and user interface changes Gregg Vanderheiden
- The next WCAG WG face-to-face will be in Brussels 13-16 June Gregg Vanderheiden
- [techs] Please review issue summaries Michael Cooper
- [2.4] Proposal for guideline 2.4 Yvette Hoitink
- Fwd: [PUBLICATION] QA Specification Tim Boland
- [tech] re: regrets Wed (will have 4.2 by tommorrow) David MacDonald
- [tech] re: regrets Wed (will have 4.2 by tommorrow) David MacDonald
- [tech] re: regrets Wed (will have 4.2 by tommorrow) David MacDonald
- RE: RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" John M Slatin
Monday, 2 May 2005
- Re: Requiring ATAG conformance Matt May
- Re: RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" lguarino@adobe.com
- Requiring ATAG conformance lguarino@adobe.com
- [TECHS] Techniques Issues for Guideline 1.3 - plain text version Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- {TECHS] Techniques Issues for Guideline 1.3 Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- [techs] Review of techniques issues for Guideline 2.4 Michael Cooper
- RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Tim Boland
- RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Joe Clark
- RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" John M Slatin
Sunday, 1 May 2005
- RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Gregg Vanderheiden
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Jason White
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Gregg Vanderheiden
Saturday, 30 April 2005
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Jason White
- RE: Guideline 1.3 and user interface changes Jason White
Friday, 29 April 2005
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Gregg Vanderheiden
- Sign language video John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Example 7) John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Example 7) Yvette Hoitink
- Late regrets for 28 April 2005 call Makoto UEKI - Infoaxia, Inc. -
- Re: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Jason White
- [minutes] 28 April 2005 WCAG WG telecon Wendy Chisholm
- [minutes] 27 April Techniques Task Force of the WCAG WG telecon Wendy Chisholm
Thursday, 28 April 2005
- Guideline 1.3 and user interface changes Jason White
- Late regrets for 28 April 2005 call Sebastiano Nutarelli (IWA/HWG)
- [1.1] Proposal for new example Yvette Hoitink
- RE: Unicode encodings Mike Barta
- RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Joe Clark
- Re: RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (specifcally about L1 SC4) Joe Clark
- RE: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (specifcally about L1 SC4) Wendy Chisholm
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Example 7) John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (specifcally about L1 SC4) John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Example 7) John M Slatin
- Re: RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (specifcally about L1 SC4) lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Example 7) Joe Clark
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (specifcally about L1 SC4) Joe Clark
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Functional text content) John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Definition of content) Gregg Vanderheiden
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Definition of functionality) John M Slatin
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Definition of content) John M Slatin
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (ASCII art) John M Slatin
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Example 8) John M Slatin
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (Example 7) John M Slatin
- regrets: Agenda: 28 April 2005 Roberto Ellero
- RE: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (specifcally about L1 SC4) John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Joe Clark
- Re: Proposal for Guideline 1.1 (specifcally about L1 SC4) John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible John M Slatin
- Re: Regrets: Agenda: 28 April 2005 WATANABE Takayuki
- Regrets: Agenda: 28 April 2005 Roberto Castaldo
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Joe Clark
- RE: [Techs] Definition of "Reliably human testable" John M Slatin
- RE: [Techs] Definition of "Reliably human testable" John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible lguarino@adobe.com
- FW: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible John M Slatin
- Fwd: Re: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible lguarino@adobe.com
- Re: [Techs] Definition of "Reliably human testable" boland@nist.gov
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible John M Slatin
- Re: [Techs] Kurzweil 3000 and WYNN zebra strips Bailey, Bruce
- double regrets info@lucamascaro.info
- Re: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Re: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Jason White
- NEW: Issue #1521 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- NEW: Issue #1522 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
- Re: Graceful degradation (was: Re: Issues summary, GL 4.2) Jason White
- Re: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Jason White
Wednesday, 27 April 2005
- RE: [Techs]Kurzweil 3000 and WYNN zebra strips John M Slatin
- RE: [Techs]Kurzweil 3000 and WYNN zebra strips Joe Clark
- Re: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible John M Slatin
- Re: Graceful degradation (was: Re: Issues summary, GL 4.2) lguarino@adobe.com
- RE: [Techs]Kurzweil 3000 and WYNN zebra strips David MacDonald
- RE: [Techs] Definition of "Reliably human testable" John M Slatin
- [Techs] Definition of "Reliably human testable" John M Slatin
- RE: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible John M Slatin
- Graceful degradation (was: Re: Issues summary, GL 4.2) Joe Clark
- Re: Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Joe Clark
- Re: [techs] Techniques for Guideline 1.3 Joe Clark
- Re: [techs] Techniques Teleconference 27 April 2005 Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- RE: Agenda: 28 April 2005 Yvette Hoitink
- Agenda: 28 April 2005 John M Slatin
- Re: Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Lisa Seeman
- [techs] Changes in requirements doc Michael Cooper
- Proposal for Guideline 1.1 Wendy Chisholm
- Issues summary, GL 4.2 Loretta Guarino Reid
Tuesday, 26 April 2005
- Re: [script-techs] Possible Scripting Techniques to help with baseline evaluation Tom Wright
- Proposal for 4.2, Ensure that user interfaces are accessible Loretta Guarino Reid
- Re: [techs] Techniques Teleconference 27 April 2005 boland@nist.gov
- Re: [techs] Techniques Teleconference 27 April 2005 Wendy Chisholm
- [techs] Techniques Teleconference 27 April 2005 Michael Cooper
- [techs] Updated requirements for techniques and checklists Michael Cooper
- [techs] Techniques for Guideline 4.2 Michael Cooper
- [techs] Techniques for Guideline 2.4 Michael Cooper
- [techs] Techniques for Guideline 1.3 Michael Cooper
- [techs] Techniques for Guideline 1.1 Michael Cooper
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Wendy Chisholm
- [TECHS] Possible Scripting Techniques with Guideline Mappings Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Proposal for 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Joe Clark
- [2.4] Proposals for 2.4 Yvette Hoitink
- RE: HTML messages (was: Re: Please comment on issue summaries) Jason White
Monday, 25 April 2005
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Re: [script-techs] Possible Scripting Techniques to help with baseline evaluation Isofarro
- RE: Accessible quotation style in email (was Re: HTML messages) John M Slatin
- RE: Accessible quotation style in email (was Re: HTML messages) Joe Clark
- Re: Accessible quotation style in email (was Re: HTML messages) David Dorward
- RE: Accessible quotation style in email (was Re: HTML messages) John M Slatin
- Regrets for 27 & 28 April telecons Christophe Strobbe
- RE: HTML messages (was: Re: Please comment on issue summaries) Yvette Hoitink
- RE: Action item: Rewriting 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" John M Slatin
- Accessible quotation style in email (was Re: HTML messages) David Dorward
- RE: HTML messages (was: Re: Please comment on issue summaries) John M Slatin
- WAI CSS and WCAG conformance pages (was: W3C style sheet fix (needed for WCAG conformance pages)) Jens Meiert
- RE: [2.4] Summary of issues for guideline 2.4 Tim Boland
- RE: Action item: Rewriting 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Joe Clark
- RE: HTML messages (was: Re: Please comment on issue summaries) Yvette Hoitink
- HTML messages (was: Re: Please comment on issue summaries) Jens Meiert
- Re: Please comment on issue summaries Lisa Seeman
- RE: Action item: Rewriting 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Jason White
- RE: [2.4] Summary of issues for guideline 2.4 Jason White
- RE: Action item: Rewriting 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Jason White
- RE: Action item: Rewriting 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" boland@nist.gov
Sunday, 24 April 2005
- RE: [2.4] Summary of issues for guideline 2.4 John M Slatin
- RE: Action item: Rewriting 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" John M Slatin
- Re: Action item: Rewriting 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation" Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Re: Loretta's analysis of UAAG Guideline 9 Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- Re: Guideline 4.2 Subgroup Report Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
- re: [2.4] Summary of issues for guideline 2.4 Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
Saturday, 23 April 2005
- RE: UAAG Priority 1 checkpoint analysis summary John M Slatin
- RE: Wendy's analysis of UAAG Guideline 6 John M Slatin
- RE: Loretta's analysis of UAAG Guideline 9 John M Slatin
- [2.4] Summary of issues for guideline 2.4 John M Slatin
- Please comment on issue summaries John M Slatin
- RE: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Christophe Strobbe
- NEW: Issue #1520 bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu
Friday, 22 April 2005
- Unicode encodings Joe Clark
- RE: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Richard Ishida
- Re: non-text content Wendy Chisholm
- Definition of information (was RE: non-text content) John M Slatin
- Re: issue 1214. 2.4: 1194.22-like SC should be level 1 [21] Wendy Chisholm
- RE: [2.4] Summary of issues for guideline 2.4 John M Slatin
- Regrets for next week for me also Tim Boland
- Late regrets: Agenda for Thursday 21 April Roberto Castaldo
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Christophe Strobbe
Thursday, 21 April 2005
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Christophe Strobbe
- Early Regrets - April 28th Doyle-Work
- One model for validation of JavaScript (vaguely related to 1.3, "Ensure that information, functionality, and structure are separable from presentation") Joe Clark
- Regrets for next week Ben Caldwell
- Re: non-text content Joe Clark
- IRC log isn't what we're talking about Joe Clark
- [minutes] 21 April 2005 telecon Wendy Chisholm
- non-text content Gregg Vanderheiden
- issue 1214. 2.4: 1194.22-like SC should be level 1 [21] Gregg Vanderheiden
- [techs] minutes from April 20 telecon Michael Cooper
- Re: [2.4] Summary of issues for guideline 2.4 Wendy Chisholm
- Regrets: Agenda (updated) for Thursday 21 April Makoto UEKI - Infoaxia, Inc. -
- Re: Agenda: 21 April 2005 Neil Soiffer
- Re: [script-techs] Possible Scripting Techniques to help with baseline evaluation Isofarro
- Regrets: Agenda (updated) for Thursday 21 April WATANABE Takayuki
- Re: Agenda: 21 April 2005 Andi Snow-Weaver
- [script-techs] Possible Scripting Techniques to help with baseline evaluation Tom Wright
- Triple Regrets: Agenda (updated) for Thursday 21 April Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Lisa Seeman
Wednesday, 20 April 2005
- [Techs]Window-Eyes info for matrix John M Slatin
- [Techs] JAWS info for matrix John M Slatin
- Re: Possible Scripting Techniques to help with baseline evaluation Isofarro
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Wendy Chisholm
- Re: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Tim Boland
- [Fwd: Re: Possible Scripting Techniques to help with baseline evaluation] Isofarro
- Re: Possible Scripting Techniques to help with baseline evaluation Isofarro
- RE: Thinking aloud...Definitions (pre-Guideline 1.1 summary) Richard Ishida

w3c-wai-gl@w3.org from April to June 2005 by date