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 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 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:59:35 UTC