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

RE: Statement of Guideline 4.2 needs work

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 23:03:26 -0600
To: <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>, "'Loretta Guarino Reid'" <lguarino@adobe.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <auto-000219329586@spamarrest.com>

I like Loretta's posting too.

But I think we should consider keeping the plug in ref.  people don't always
think of  plug ins as user agents and we should not figure they will have
read another doc. 
 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Jason White
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 9:58 PM
To: Loretta Guarino Reid
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Statement of Guideline 4.2 needs work


I wrote a reply to this thread earlier but it doesn't seem to have made it
to the list.

Loretta's proposal is substantially superior to the existing wording.
I suggest removing all mention of "plug-ins" from guideline 4.2, since they
are included in the UAAG 1.0 definition of "user agent". Thus, the use of
the term "plug-in" in guideline 4.2 is unnecessary and redundant.

Guideline 4.2 will be up for revision anyway as the working group strives to
address the problems surrounding user agent support. For the moment I
recommend accepting Loretta's proposal (excluding the term "plug-in"), while
recognizing that these issues are still very much open for discussion.
Received on Sunday, 27 February 2005 05:04:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:35 GMT