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

RE: Possible format for techniques Doc.doc

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:59:02 +1100 (EST)
To: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
cc: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0503181352460.6469@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>



On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, John M Slatin wrote:

>
> It's also a little daunting! I say that because it sounds like these are
> actually two separate documents, each one pretty large in its own right
> (I'm seeing a heavy book in my mind's eye). And I'm not sure I
> understand how they relate to what's presently in the
> Technology-specific or the General Techniques docs.

Take a single techniques document. It contains a list of techniques
(required and, if we so decide, advisory) related to each success
criterion. One way of ordering these is by success criterion. Another way
is by the features of the language used, for example the different parts
of the HTML spec that deal with block and inline structures, forms,
multimedia, etc. The main question then is whether the techniques can be
so drafted that they make sense in both orderings.

For the general techniques this might be problematic as there aren't any
tasks or language features involved; rather, the general techniques serve
to complete the technology-specifics by providing those techniques that
would otherwise be repeated in each technology-specific document, because
they are independent of the implementation technologies.

What do you think? Does this help to solidify the proposal?
Received on Friday, 18 March 2005 02:59:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:36 GMT